Literature DB >> 17321154

A comparison of methods for shoulder strength assessment and analysis of Constant score change in patients aged over fifty years in the United Kingdom.

Michael J Walton1, Julia C Walton, Laura A M Honorez, Victoria F Harding, W Angus Wallace.   

Abstract

Normal values for shoulder assessment are imperative for the diagnosis of pathology and measurement of treatment outcome. Normal values for the United Kingdom are currently not known. This study comprised 108 control patients aged over 50 years who were under the care of one general practitioner, and the Constant score was measured. The Constant score was assessed via 3 techniques for strength measurement: maximum strength with myometer, mean strength with myometer, and maximum strength with fixed spring balance. Myometer maximum strength values were very similar to fixed spring balance maximum strength values, with a mean difference of 0.5. Myometer mean strength was lower than myometer maximum strength by 3 points. Age and sex both significantly affected Constant score (P < .001 for both). The Constant score fell by 0.3 points per year over 50 years of age. Men had a score that was 7.5 points greater than that in women. The Constant score decreases predictably with age in the United Kingdom. Methods of strength assessment are not the same. A uniform method of shoulder strength assessment is required to allow for meaningful comparisons between series.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17321154     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2006.08.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg        ISSN: 1058-2746            Impact factor:   3.019


  9 in total

1.  Reliability of shoulder abduction strength measure for the Constant-Murley score.

Authors:  Michael Tobias Hirschmann; Björn Wind; Felix Amsler; Thomas Gross
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-07-29       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  Use of scoring systems for assessing and reporting the outcome results from shoulder surgery and arthroplasty.

Authors:  Simon Booker; Nawaf Alfahad; Martin Scott; Ben Gooding; W Angus Wallace
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2015-03-18

3.  A patient-derived Constant-Murley score is comparable to a clinician-derived score.

Authors:  Ofer Levy; Omar Haddo; Samir Massoud; Hannan Mullett; Ehud Atoun
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-08-28       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Gender-specific Constant score correction for age.

Authors:  A Tavakkolizadeh; A Ghassemi; T Colegate-Stone; A Latif; J Sinha
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2009-02-28       Impact factor: 4.342

5.  Clinical and Functional Results of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty and Postoperative Rehabilitation Protocol.

Authors:  Vitor C Pereira; José Barreto; Sónia Tomé; João Cunha; João Amaro; Jorge Moreira; António Miranda; Catarina A Branco
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-03-19

Review 6.  Outcome assessment in the treatment of rotator cuff tear: what is utilized in Brazil?

Authors:  Jorge Henrique Assunção; Eduardo Angeli Malavolta; Vitor Rodrigues Domingues; Mauro Emilio Conforto Gracitelli; Arnaldo Amado Ferreira Neto
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop       Date:  2017-09-01

7.  Dynamic thoracohumeral kinematics are dependent upon the etiology of the shoulder injury.

Authors:  Juan López-Pascual; Álvaro Page; Pilar Serra-Añó
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-08-25       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Primary open anterior shoulder stabilization: a long-term, retrospective cohort study on the impact of subscapularis muscle alterations on recurrence.

Authors:  Axel Gamulin; Romain Dayer; Anne Lübbeke; Hermes Miozzari; Pierre Hoffmeyer
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 2.362

Review 9.  Constant-Murley Score: systematic review and standardized evaluation in different shoulder pathologies.

Authors:  Kalliopi Vrotsou; Mónica Ávila; Mónica Machón; Maider Mateo-Abad; Yolanda Pardo; Olatz Garin; Carlos Zaror; Nerea González; Antonio Escobar; Ricardo Cuéllar
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2018-05-10       Impact factor: 4.147

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.