CORTICAL BONE MECHANICS TECHNOLOGY – CBMT™

Science & Evidence: Measuring Bone Mechanics

OsteoDx has developed Cortical Bone Mechanics Technology (CBMT), a radiation-free, noninvasive dynamic three-point bending test measuring flexural rigidity and damping in humans to characterize bone mechanical properties, quality, and strength. [R1-R5]

MECHANICS-BASED ASSESSMENT

Bone mechanics, measured non-invasively.

Bone strength reflects more than mineral density. It emerges from geometry, material properties, cortical structure, and how bone behaves under load. CBMT was developed to evaluate that mechanical response at the ulna, adding a mechanics-based view of fracture-relevant bone quality that complements established assessment tools.

OsteoDx CBMT closeup in action
  1. Science & Evidence

THE TECHNOLOGY BEHIND CBMT

The Science of Cortical Bone Mechanics

Cortical bone accounts for roughly 80% of adult skeletal bone mass and forms the dense outer structure of long bones. Its geometry and material behavior contribute importantly to bending, torsional, and compressive resistance. [R6–R9]

With aging, cortical thinning and increased cortical porosity can reduce mechanical integrity, particularly at appendicular skeletal sites. CBMT focuses on the mid-diaphyseal ulna, a cortical-dominant and accessible long-bone region suited for non-invasive bending assessment. [R2–R4, R8–R9]

MECHANICS-BASED MEASUREMENT

How CBMT™ Works

CBMT applies controlled, low-amplitude mechanical stimulation over the ulna and measures the resulting vibrational response. The frequency response is analyzed using a biomechanical model to estimate bending stiffness, flexural rigidity, and damping-related parameters. [R1–R4]

CBMT is designed to be:

  • Non-invasive

    Mechanical assessment through the skin, without needles, injections, or surgical procedures.

  • Free of ionizing radiation

    Uses controlled mechanical input and vibration sensing, not ionizing radiation.

  • Low-force

    Uses gentle mechanical input designed for repeatable testing.

  • Efficient

    Published workflows report approximately 10-12 minutes per arm for setup and testing; the website can state ~15 minutes if that reflects the planned user workflow. [R2–R3]

  • Designed for repeat assessment

    Quantitative outputs support follow-up measurement in research and clinical-study settings.

The result is an objective, mechanics-based profile of cortical bone at the forearm.

MECHANICAL BONE QUALITY

Accurately Estimates Whole Bone Strength

Cadaveric data show that flexural rigidity is nearly perfectly correlated with whole bone breaking strength. [R4]

CBMT Accuracy figure
Complimentary Information 

Why Mechanics Matter

Bone mineral density remains an important clinical measure, but density alone does not fully describe mechanical competence. Bone strength also depends on geometry, microarchitecture, tissue material behavior, porosity, and how the whole bone responds under loading. [R6–R9]

Population studies show that many fragility fractures occur in individuals whose areal BMD is not in the osteoporotic range. In the Rotterdam Study, most non-vertebral fractures occurred in people with normal or osteopenic areal BMD rather than osteoporosis. [R7]

CBMT evaluates bending-related mechanics at a cortical-rich appendicular site, providing a distinct, non-invasive measurement of mechanical bone quality. [R1–R4]

CBMT™ Outperforms DXA for Fracture Discrimination

CLINICAL EVIDENCE

STRONGER Study: CBMT-derived mechanics
and fracture-case discrimination.

The STRONGER Study was a multicenter, case-control study of 372 postmenopausal women aged 50-80 years enrolled across four U.S. sites. The study compared CBMT-derived ulna flexural rigidity with DXA-derived areal BMD for distinguishing women with prior low-trauma fracture from matched controls. [R1, R3]

In the peer-reviewed STRONGER results, women with prior fracture had 21-22% lower CBMT-derived ulna flexural rigidity than controls. CBMT-derived ulna flexural rigidity demonstrated good fracture-case discrimination in the study cohort, with AUC 0.80 for weight-normalized EI and 0.76 for absolute EI. DXA-derived areal BMD at measured skeletal sites showed fair-to-poor discrimination in the same cohort, with AUCs <=0.63. [R1]

 

Get in Touch

A brighter future for bone health starts with
smarter measurements.

Whether you run a clinical site, a longevity clinic, or a fund — let's talk about how OsteoDx™ fits into your roadmap.

Selected Peer-Reviewed Reference List

Clicking on ↩ should return you to the original source, as some citations use the same reference in multiple locations on this page.

 

R1. Clark BC et al. In vivo mechanical assessment of cortical bone rigidity enhances fracture discrimination beyond DXA in postmenopausal women. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research. 2026. PMID: 41697006. ↩
R2. Dick A et al. Cortical bone mechanics technology signal quality maintains robustness across a range of biometric profiles. JBMR Plus. 2025;9(9):ziaf116. PMID: 40842906. ↩
R3. Warden SJ et al. Fracture discrimination capability of ulnar flexural rigidity measured via Cortical Bone Mechanics Technology: study protocol for The STRONGER Study. JBMR Plus. 2024;8(1):ziad002.  PMID: 38690126. ↩
R4. Bowman L et al. A new noninvasive mechanical bending test accurately predicts ulna bending strength in cadaveric human arms. Bone. 2019;120:336-346. PMID: 30496886.↩
R5. Bowman L et al. In Vivo Assessment of Cortical Bone Fragility. Current Osteoporosis Reports. 2020. PMID: 32088857. ↩
R6. Clarke B. Normal bone anatomy and physiology. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. 2008;3 Suppl 3:S131-S139. PMC3152283. ↩
R7. Trajanoska K et al. Fracture incidence and secular trends between 1989 and 2013 in a population-based cohort: The Rotterdam Study. Osteoporosis International. 2018. PMID: 29885926. ↩
R8. Zabaze RMD et al. Intracortical remodelling and porosity in the distal radius and post-mortem femurs of women: a cross-sectional study. Lancet. 2010;375(9727):1729-1736. PMID: 20472174. ↩
R9. Bala Y et al. Role of cortical bone in bone fragility. Current Osteoporosis Reports. 2015;13(6):334-343. PMID: 26002033. ↩
R10. FDA / 21 CFR 812 investigational-device labeling and promotion restrictions. Investigational device labeling must not imply safety or effectiveness, and sponsors may not promote or test-market an investigational device before authorization. ↩