Cédric Schwartz1, Jean-Louis Croisier2, Elise Rigaux2, Vincent Denoël3, Olivier Brüls4, Bénédicte Forthomme2. 1. Laboratory of Human Motion Analysis, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium. Electronic address: cedric.schwartz@ulg.ac.be. 2. Laboratory of Human Motion Analysis, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium; Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium. 3. Laboratory of Human Motion Analysis, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium; Department of Architecture, Geology, Environment and Constructions, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium. 4. Laboratory of Human Motion Analysis, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium; Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, University of Liège, Liège, Belgium.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The contralateral shoulder is often used as a reference when evaluating a pathologic shoulder. However, the literature provides contradictory results regarding the symmetry of the scapular pattern in a healthy population. We assume that several factors including gender and type of motion may influence the bilateral symmetry of the scapulae. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The dominant and nondominant shoulders of 2 populations of men and women comprising 11 subjects each were evaluated for 3 distinct motions: flexion in the sagittal plane, abduction in the frontal plane, and glenohumeral internal/external rotation with the arm abducted at 90°. Posture, kinematics, and range of motion were studied separately. RESULTS: Asymmetries are observed for motions performed in the frontal and sagittal plane but not for internal/external rotation with the arm abducted at 90°. For both male and female populations, multiplanar asymmetries are observed and the dominant scapula has a larger upward rotation. The asymmetries mainly originate in the scapula's kinematics and not in its original posture. CONCLUSION: Small but significant asymmetries exist between the dominant and nondominant shoulders in terms of kinematics. One should be aware of these differences when using the contralateral shoulder as a reference. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Basic science study, kinematics
BACKGROUND: The contralateral shoulder is often used as a reference when evaluating a pathologic shoulder. However, the literature provides contradictory results regarding the symmetry of the scapular pattern in a healthy population. We assume that several factors including gender and type of motion may influence the bilateral symmetry of the scapulae. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The dominant and nondominant shoulders of 2 populations of men and women comprising 11 subjects each were evaluated for 3 distinct motions: flexion in the sagittal plane, abduction in the frontal plane, and glenohumeral internal/external rotation with the arm abducted at 90°. Posture, kinematics, and range of motion were studied separately. RESULTS: Asymmetries are observed for motions performed in the frontal and sagittal plane but not for internal/external rotation with the arm abducted at 90°. For both male and female populations, multiplanar asymmetries are observed and the dominant scapula has a larger upward rotation. The asymmetries mainly originate in the scapula's kinematics and not in its original posture. CONCLUSION: Small but significant asymmetries exist between the dominant and nondominant shoulders in terms of kinematics. One should be aware of these differences when using the contralateral shoulder as a reference. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Basic science study, kinematics
Authors: Taku Hatta; Hugo Giambini; Yoshiaki Itoigawa; Alexander W Hooke; John W Sperling; Scott P Steinmann; Eiji Itoi; Kai-Nan An Journal: J Biomech Date: 2017-07-21 Impact factor: 2.712
Authors: Taku Hatta; Hugo Giambini; Alexander W Hooke; Chunfeng Zhao; John W Sperling; Scott P Steinmann; Nobuyuki Yamamoto; Eiji Itoi; Kai-Nan An Journal: Arthroscopy Date: 2016-05-04 Impact factor: 4.772
Authors: Taku Hatta; Hugo Giambini; Koji Sukegawa; Yoshiaki Yamanaka; John W Sperling; Scott P Steinmann; Eiji Itoi; Kai-Nan An Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-05-06 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Taku Hatta; Hugo Giambini; Chunfeng Zhao; John W Sperling; Scott P Steinmann; Eiji Itoi; Kai-Nan An Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-09-01 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Rakesh Krishnan; Niclas Björsell; Elena M Gutierrez-Farewik; Christian Smith Journal: Med Biol Eng Comput Date: 2018-10-26 Impact factor: 2.602
Authors: Jyoti Sharma; Candice Maenza; Andrea Myers; Erik B Lehman; Andrew R Karduna; Robert L Sainburg; April D Armstrong Journal: Int J Orthop Date: 2020-02-07