Literature DB >> 20331889

The kinematics of upper extremity reaching: a reliability study on people with and without shoulder impingement syndrome.

Jean-Sébastien Roy1, Hélène Moffet, Bradford J McFadyen, Joy C Macdermid.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Tasks chosen to evaluate motor performance should reflect the movement deficits characteristic of the target population and present an appropriate challenge for the patients who would be evaluated. A reaching task that evaluates impairment characteristics of people with shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS) was developed to evaluate the motor performance of this population. The objectives of this study were to characterize the reproducibility of this reaching task in people with and without SIS and to evaluate the impact of the number of trials on reproducibility.
METHODS: Thirty subjects with SIS and twenty healthy subjects participated in the first measurement session to evaluate intrasession reliability. Ten healthy subjects were retested within 2 to 7 days to assess intersession reliability. At each measurement session, upper extremity kinematic patterns were evaluated during a reaching task. Ten trials were recorded. Thereafter, the upper extremity position at the end of reaching and total joint excursion that occurred during reaching were calculated. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and minimal detectable change (MDC) were used to estimate intra and intersession reliability.
RESULTS: Intrasession reliability for total joint excursion was good to very good when based on the first two trials (0.77<ICC<0.99), and very good when based on either the first or last five trials (ICC>0.92). As for end-reach position, intrasession reliability was very good when using either the first two, first five or last five trials (ICC>0.82). Globally, MDC were smaller for the last five trials. Intersession reliability of total joint excursion and position at the end of reaching was good to very good when using the mean of the first two or five trials (0.69<ICC<0.95), and very good when using the mean of the ten trials (ICC>0.82). For most joints, MDC were smaller when using all ten trials.
CONCLUSIONS: The reaching task proposed to evaluate the upper limb motor performance was found reliable in people with and without SIS. Furthermore, the minimal difference necessary to infer a meaningful change in motor performance was determined, indicating that relatively small changes in task performance can be interpreted as a change in motor performance.

Entities:  

Year:  2010        PMID: 20331889      PMCID: PMC2857852          DOI: 10.1186/1758-2555-2-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol        ISSN: 1758-2555


  22 in total

1.  Three-dimensional analysis of the width of the subacromial space in healthy subjects and patients with impingement syndrome.

Authors:  H Graichen; H Bonel; T Stammberger; M Haubner; H Rohrer; K H Englmeier; M Reiser; F Eckstein
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 2.  The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration.

Authors:  D G Altman; K F Schulz; D Moher; M Egger; F Davidoff; D Elbourne; P C Gøtzsche; T Lang
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2001-04-17       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Comparison of scapular kinematics between elevation and lowering of the arm in the scapular plane.

Authors:  John D Borstad; Paula M Ludewig
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 2.063

Review 4.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability.

Authors:  P E Shrout; J L Fleiss
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 17.737

5.  Compensatory strategies for reaching in stroke.

Authors:  M C Cirstea; M F Levin
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 13.501

6.  In vivo estimation of the glenohumeral joint rotation center from scapular bony landmarks by linear regression.

Authors:  C G Meskers; F C van der Helm; L A Rozendaal; P M Rozing
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 2.712

7.  The McGill Pain Questionnaire: major properties and scoring methods.

Authors:  Ronald Melzack
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1975-09       Impact factor: 6.961

8.  Scapular behavior in shoulder impingement syndrome.

Authors:  Luc J Hébert; Hélène Moffet; Bradford J McFadyen; Clermont E Dionne
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 3.966

Review 9.  Alterations in shoulder kinematics and associated muscle activity in people with symptoms of shoulder impingement.

Authors:  P M Ludewig; T M Cook
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2000-03

10.  Radiologic measurement of superior displacement of the humeral head in the impingement syndrome.

Authors:  A Deutsch; D W Altchek; E Schwartz; J C Otis; R F Warren
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  1996 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.019

View more
  3 in total

1.  Evaluation of movements of lower limbs in non-professional ballet dancers: hip abduction and flexion.

Authors:  Erica E Valenti; Vitor E Valenti; Celso Ferreira; Luiz Carlos M Vanderlei; Oseas F Moura Filho; Tatiana Dias de Carvalho; Nadir Tassi; Marcio Petenusso; Claudio Leone; Edison N Fujiki; Hugo Macedo Junior; Carlos B de Mello Monteiro; Isadora L Moreno; Ana Clara Cr Gonçalves; Luiz Carlos de Abreu
Journal:  Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol       Date:  2011-08-05

2.  Development and application of stereo camera-based upper extremity workspace evaluation in patients with neuromuscular diseases.

Authors:  Gregorij Kurillo; Jay J Han; Richard T Abresch; Alina Nicorici; Posu Yan; Ruzena Bajcsy
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-09-17       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Grade-IV inferior glenohumeral mobilization does not immediately alter shoulder and scapular muscle activity: a repeated-measures study in asymptomatic individuals.

Authors:  Daniel Cury Ribeiro; Ashleigh Day; Clark R Dickerson
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2017-02-14
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.