Cargando…

Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Measurements Differ Depending on Stabilization Techniques

BACKGROUND: The loss of glenohumeral internal rotation range of motion in overhead athletes has been well documented in the literature. Several different methods of assessing this measurement have been described, making comparison between the results of studies difficult. HYPOTHESIS: Significant dif...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wilk, Kevin E., Reinold, Michael M., Macrina, Leonard C., Porterfield, Ron, Devine, Kathleen M., Suarez, Kim, Andrews, James R.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3445072/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23015864
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1941738108331201
_version_ 1782243759650504704
author Wilk, Kevin E.
Reinold, Michael M.
Macrina, Leonard C.
Porterfield, Ron
Devine, Kathleen M.
Suarez, Kim
Andrews, James R.
author_facet Wilk, Kevin E.
Reinold, Michael M.
Macrina, Leonard C.
Porterfield, Ron
Devine, Kathleen M.
Suarez, Kim
Andrews, James R.
author_sort Wilk, Kevin E.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The loss of glenohumeral internal rotation range of motion in overhead athletes has been well documented in the literature. Several different methods of assessing this measurement have been described, making comparison between the results of studies difficult. HYPOTHESIS: Significant differences in the amount of internal rotation range of motion exist when using different methods of stabilization. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive laboratory study. METHODS: Three techniques were used bilaterally in random fashion to measure glenohumeral internal rotation range of motion: stabilization of the humeral head, stabilization of the scapula, and visual inspection without stabilization. An initial study on 20 asymptomatic participants was performed to determine the intrarater and interrater reliability for each measurement technique. Once complete, measurements were performed on 39 asymptomatic professional baseball players to determine if a difference existed in measurement techniques and if there was a significant side-to-side difference. A 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used. RESULTS: While interrater reliability was fair between all 3 methods, scapular stabilization provided the best intrarater reliability. A statistically significant difference was observed between all 3 methods (P < .001). Internal rotation was significantly less in the dominant shoulder than in the nondominant shoulder (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Differences in internal rotation range of motion measurements exist when using different methods. The scapula stabilization method displayed the highest intrarater reproducibility and should be considered when evaluating internal rotation passive range of motion of the glenohumeral joint. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A standardized method of measuring internal rotation range of motion is required to accurately compare physical examinations of patients. The authors recommend the use of the scapula stabilization method to assess internal rotation range of motion by allowing normal glenohumeral arthrokinematics while stabilizing the scapulothoracic articulation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3445072
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-34450722012-09-26 Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Measurements Differ Depending on Stabilization Techniques Wilk, Kevin E. Reinold, Michael M. Macrina, Leonard C. Porterfield, Ron Devine, Kathleen M. Suarez, Kim Andrews, James R. Sports Health Sports Physical Therapy BACKGROUND: The loss of glenohumeral internal rotation range of motion in overhead athletes has been well documented in the literature. Several different methods of assessing this measurement have been described, making comparison between the results of studies difficult. HYPOTHESIS: Significant differences in the amount of internal rotation range of motion exist when using different methods of stabilization. STUDY DESIGN: Descriptive laboratory study. METHODS: Three techniques were used bilaterally in random fashion to measure glenohumeral internal rotation range of motion: stabilization of the humeral head, stabilization of the scapula, and visual inspection without stabilization. An initial study on 20 asymptomatic participants was performed to determine the intrarater and interrater reliability for each measurement technique. Once complete, measurements were performed on 39 asymptomatic professional baseball players to determine if a difference existed in measurement techniques and if there was a significant side-to-side difference. A 2-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used. RESULTS: While interrater reliability was fair between all 3 methods, scapular stabilization provided the best intrarater reliability. A statistically significant difference was observed between all 3 methods (P < .001). Internal rotation was significantly less in the dominant shoulder than in the nondominant shoulder (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Differences in internal rotation range of motion measurements exist when using different methods. The scapula stabilization method displayed the highest intrarater reproducibility and should be considered when evaluating internal rotation passive range of motion of the glenohumeral joint. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A standardized method of measuring internal rotation range of motion is required to accurately compare physical examinations of patients. The authors recommend the use of the scapula stabilization method to assess internal rotation range of motion by allowing normal glenohumeral arthrokinematics while stabilizing the scapulothoracic articulation. SAGE Publications 2009-03 /pmc/articles/PMC3445072/ /pubmed/23015864 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1941738108331201 Text en © 2009 American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine
spellingShingle Sports Physical Therapy
Wilk, Kevin E.
Reinold, Michael M.
Macrina, Leonard C.
Porterfield, Ron
Devine, Kathleen M.
Suarez, Kim
Andrews, James R.
Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Measurements Differ Depending on Stabilization Techniques
title Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Measurements Differ Depending on Stabilization Techniques
title_full Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Measurements Differ Depending on Stabilization Techniques
title_fullStr Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Measurements Differ Depending on Stabilization Techniques
title_full_unstemmed Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Measurements Differ Depending on Stabilization Techniques
title_short Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Measurements Differ Depending on Stabilization Techniques
title_sort glenohumeral internal rotation measurements differ depending on stabilization techniques
topic Sports Physical Therapy
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3445072/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23015864
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1941738108331201
work_keys_str_mv AT wilkkevine glenohumeralinternalrotationmeasurementsdifferdependingonstabilizationtechniques
AT reinoldmichaelm glenohumeralinternalrotationmeasurementsdifferdependingonstabilizationtechniques
AT macrinaleonardc glenohumeralinternalrotationmeasurementsdifferdependingonstabilizationtechniques
AT porterfieldron glenohumeralinternalrotationmeasurementsdifferdependingonstabilizationtechniques
AT devinekathleenm glenohumeralinternalrotationmeasurementsdifferdependingonstabilizationtechniques
AT suarezkim glenohumeralinternalrotationmeasurementsdifferdependingonstabilizationtechniques
AT andrewsjamesr glenohumeralinternalrotationmeasurementsdifferdependingonstabilizationtechniques