Literature DB >> 18171970

Stiffness regulation and muscle-recruitment strategies of the shoulder in response to external rotation perturbations.

Kellie C Huxel1, C Buz Swanik, Kathleen A Swanik, Arthur R Bartolozzi, Howard J Hillstrom, Michael R Sitler, Dani M Moffit.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The complex interactions between capsuloligamentous structures and muscle-recruitment strategies that maintain glenohumeral stability remain unclear. The purposes of the present study were to determine whether stiffness regulation and muscle-activation strategies differed under varying joint positions and levels of contraction in the shoulder and to determine the relationship between generalized joint laxity, glenohumeral joint laxity, and joint stiffness.
METHODS: Forty healthy, physically active subjects with a mean age (and standard deviation) of 25.2 +/- 4.6 years, a mean height of 174.7 +/- 6.7 cm, and a mean mass of 73.1 +/- 13.8 kg were tested. Shoulder stiffness and the activation of muscles (including the rotator cuff and the anterior deltoid) were measured at two levels of internal rotation torque (0% and 50% of maximum) and two joint positions (0 degrees and 90% of maximum external rotation) before and after a 5 degrees external rotation perturbation. Generalized laxity and glenohumeral joint laxity (in the anterior, posterior, and inferior directions) were also assessed.
RESULTS: Stiffness was 77% greater at 50% of maximum internal rotation torque than at 0% of maximum internal rotation torque (p < 0.001) but was not significantly different between joint positions (p = 0.73). From 0% to 50% of maximum internal rotation torque, preparatory and reactive recruitment of the subscapularis increased significantly more (p < 0.05) than those of the other muscles. Also, subscapularis preparatory activity was 36% greater in 0 degrees of external rotation than in 90% of maximum external rotation (p < 0.01). Generalized joint laxity (as indicated by a score of >/=4) was present in 20% of the subjects. Glenohumeral joint laxity (as indicated by a grade of >/=2) was present in the anterior, posterior, and inferior directions in 13%, 15%, and 15% of the subjects, respectively. No correlation existed between passive stiffness and generalized or glenohumeral laxity (r = -0.12 to 0.29; p = 0.08 to 0.48).
CONCLUSIONS: Moderate levels of muscle contraction can significantly increase glenohumeral joint stiffness and stability. Preactivation of the subscapularis appears to be the primary dynamic stabilizer with the arm in 0 degrees of external rotation. However, with the arm in 90% of maximum external rotation (the apprehension position), less subscapularis activity is observed and the maintenance of stability may shift toward other musculoskeletal structures because joint stiffness does not change. A relationship between generalized joint laxity, glenohumeral laxity, and stiffness was not observed in healthy subjects.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18171970     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.F.01133

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  5 in total

1.  Characteristics of stabilizer muscles: a systematic review.

Authors:  Sangeeta Sangwan; Rodney A Green; Nicholas F Taylor
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 1.037

2.  Differences in lateral drop jumps from an unknown height among individuals with functional ankle instability.

Authors:  Adam Rosen; Charles Swanik; Stephen Thomas; Joseph Glutting; Christopher Knight; Thomas W Kaminski
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2013-08-16       Impact factor: 2.860

3.  Objective Assessment of Joint Stiffness: A Clinically Oriented Hardware and Software Device with an Application to the Shoulder Joint.

Authors:  Kevin McQuade; Robert Price; Nelson Liu; Marcia A Ciol
Journal:  J Nov Physiother       Date:  2012-08-30

4.  Injury prevention for ski-area employees: a physiological assessment of lift operators, instructors, and patrollers.

Authors:  Delia Roberts
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-07-25       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 5.  Scapular Dynamic Muscular Stiffness Assessed through Myotonometry: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Ana S C Melo; Eduardo B Cruz; João Paulo Vilas-Boas; Andreia S P Sousa
Journal:  Sensors (Basel)       Date:  2022-03-27       Impact factor: 3.576

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.