Three-dimensional primary stability of cementless femoral stems

OBJECTIVE: This study investigates by means of a new bone-prosthesis interface motion detector whether conceptual design differences of femoral stems are reflected in their primary stability pattern. DESIGN: An in vitro experiment using a biaxial materials testing machine in combination with three-dimensional motion measurement devices was performed. BACKGROUND: Primary stability of uncemented total hip replacements is considered to be a prerequisite for the quality of bony ongrowth to the femoral stem. Dynamic motion as a response to loading as well as total motion of the prosthesis have to be considered under quasi-physiological cyclic loading conditions. METHODS: Seven paired fresh cadaveric femora were used for the testing of two types of uncemented femoral stems with different anchoring concepts: CLS stem (Spotorno) and Cone Prosthesis (Wagner). Under sinusoidal cyclic loading mimicking in vivo hip joint forces a new measurement technique was applied allowing for the analysis of the three-dimensional interface motion. RESULTS: Considerable differences between the two prostheses could be detected both in their dynamic motion and total motion behaviour. Whereas the CLS stem, due to the wedge-shaped concept, provides smaller total motions, the longitudinal ribs of the Cone prostheses result in a substantially smaller dynamic motion. CONCLUSIONS: The measuring technique provided reliable and accurate data illustrating the three-dimensional interface motion of uncemented femoral stems.

Counting scars on tree stems to assess rockfall hazards: A low effort approach, but how reliable?

Rockfall is a widespread and hazardous process in mountain environments, but data on past events are only rarely available. Growth-ring series from trees impacted by rockfall were successfully used in the past to overcome the lack of archival records. Dendrogeomorphic techniques have been demonstrated to allow very accurate dating and reconstruction of spatial and temporal rockfall activity, but the approach has been cited to be labor intensive and time consuming. In this study, we present a simplified method to quantify rockfall processes on forested slopes requiring less time and efforts. The approach is based on a counting of visible scars on the stem surface of Common beech (Fagus sylvatica L.). Data are presented from a site in the Inn valley (Austria), where rocks are frequently detached from an ~ 200-m-high, south-facing limestone cliff. We compare results obtained from (i) the “classical” analysis of growth disturbances in the tree-ring series of 33 Norway spruces (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) and (ii) data obtained with a scar count on the stem surface of 50 F. sylvatica trees. A total of 277 rockfall events since A.D. 1819 could be reconstructed from tree-ring records of P. abies, whereas 1140 scars were observed on the stem surface of F. sylvatica. Absolute numbers of rockfalls (and hence return intervals) vary significantly between the approaches, and the mean number of rockfalls observed on the stem surface of F. sylvatica exceeds that of P. abies by a factor of 2.7. On the other hand, both methods yield comparable data on the spatial distribution of relative rockfall activity. Differences may be explained by a great portion of masked scars in P. abies and the conservation of signs of impacts on the stem of F. sylvatica. Besides, data indicate that several scars on the bark of F. sylvatica may stem from the same impact and thus lead to an overestimation of rockfall activity.

Intergroup bias in third-party punishment stems from both ingroup favoritism and outgroup discrimination

Social norms pervade almost every aspect of social interaction. If they are violated, not only legal institutions, but other members of society as well, punish, i.e., inflict costs on the wrongdoer. Sanctioning occurs even when the punishers themselves were not harmed directly and even when it is costly for them. There is evidence for intergroup bias in this third-party punishment: third-parties, who share group membership with victims, punish outgroup perpetrators more harshly than ingroup perpetrators. However, it is unknown whether a discriminatory treatment of outgroup perpetrators (outgroup discrimination) or a preferential treatment of ingroup perpetrators (ingroup favoritism) drives this bias. To answer this question, the punishment of outgroup and ingroup perpetrators must be compared to a baseline, i.e., unaffiliated perpetrators. By applying a costly punishment game, we found stronger punishment of outgroup versus unaffiliated perpetrators and weaker punishment of ingroup versus unaffiliated perpetrators. This demonstrates that both ingroup favoritism and outgroup discrimination drive intergroup bias in third-party punishment of perpetrators that belong to distinct social groups.