Purpose:Inverse-dynamics (ID) analysis is an approach widely used for studying spine biomechanics and the estimation of muscle forces. Despite the increasing structural complexity of spine models, ID analysis results substantially rely on accurate kinematic data that most of the current technologies are not capable to provide. For this reason, the model complexity is drastically reduced by assuming three degrees of freedom spherical joints and generic kinematic coupling constraints. Moreover, the majority of current ID spine models neglect the contribution of passive structures. The aim of this ID analysis study was to determine the impact of modelled passive structures (i.e., ligaments and intervertebral discs) on remaining joint forces and torques that muscles must balance in the functional spinal unit.Methods:For this purpose, an existing generic spine model developed for the use in thedemoasoftware environment was transferred into the musculoskeletal modelling platformOpenSim. The thoracolumbar spine model previously used in forward-dynamics (FD) simulations provided a full kinematic description of a flexion-extension movement. By using the obtainedin silicokinematics, ID analysis was performed. The individual contribution of passive elements to the generalised net joint forces and torques was evaluated in a step-wise approach increasing the model complexity by adding individual biological structures of the spine.Results:The implementation of intervertebral discs and ligaments has significantly reduced compressive loading and anterior torque that is attributed to the acting net muscle forces by −200% and −75%, respectively. The ID model kinematics and kinetics were cross-validated against the FD simulation results.Conclusion:This study clearly shows the importance of incorporating passive spinal structures on the accurate computation of remaining joint loads. Furthermore, for the first time, a generic spine model was used and cross-validated in two different musculoskeletal modelling platforms, i.e.,demoaandOpenSim, respectively. In future, a comparison of neuromuscular control strategies for spinal movement can be investigated using both approaches.