Display options
Cite
Lindenfeld TN, Fleckenstein CM, Levy MS, et al. Reliability of a New Clinical Instrument for Measuring Internal and External Glenohumeral Rotation. Sports Health. 2015;7(4):312-7doi: 10.1177/1941738113512094.
Lindenfeld, T. N., Fleckenstein, C. M., Levy, M. S., Grood, E. S., Frush, T. J., & Parameswaran, A. D. (2015). Reliability of a New Clinical Instrument for Measuring Internal and External Glenohumeral Rotation. Sports health, 7(4), 312-7. https://doi.org/10.1177/1941738113512094
Lindenfeld, Thomas N, et al. "Reliability of a New Clinical Instrument for Measuring Internal and External Glenohumeral Rotation." Sports health vol. 7,4 (2015): 312-7. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1941738113512094
Lindenfeld TN, Fleckenstein CM, Levy MS, Grood ES, Frush TJ, Parameswaran AD. Reliability of a New Clinical Instrument for Measuring Internal and External Glenohumeral Rotation. Sports Health. 2015 Jul;7(4):312-7. doi: 10.1177/1941738113512094. PMID: 26137176; PMCID: PMC4481671.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Sports Health. 2015 Jul;7(4):312-7. doi: 10.1177/1941738113512094.

Reliability of a New Clinical Instrument for Measuring Internal and External Glenohumeral Rotation.

Sports health

Thomas N Lindenfeld, Cassie M Fleckenstein, Martin S Levy, Edward S Grood, Todd J Frush, A Dushi Parameswaran

Affiliations

  1. Cincinnati Sports Medicine Research and Education Foundation, Cincinnati, Ohio.
  2. University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio.
  3. Porretta Center for Orthopaedic Surgery-Novi Orthopaedic Center, Novi, Michigan.
  4. Reconstructive Orthopedic Center of Houston, Houston, Texas.

PMID: 26137176 PMCID: PMC4481671 DOI: 10.1177/1941738113512094

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The shoulder plays a critical role in many overhead athletic activities. Several studies have shown alterations in shoulder range of motion (ROM) in the dominant shoulder of overhead athletes and correlation with significantly increased risk of injury to the shoulder and elbow. The purpose of this study was to measure isolated glenohumeral joint internal/external rotation (IR/ER) to determine inter- and intraobserver reliability of a new clinical device.

HYPOTHESIS: (1) Inter- and intraobserver reliability would exceed 90% for measures of glenohumeral joint IR, ER, and total arc of motion; (2) the dominant arm would exhibit significantly increased ER, significantly decreased IR, and no difference in total arc of motion compared with the nondominant shoulder; and (3) a significant difference exists in total arc between male and female patients.

STUDY DESIGN: Case series.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4.

METHODS: Thirty-seven subjects (mean age, 23 years; range, 13-54 years) were tested by 2 orthopaedic surgeons. A single test consisted of 1 arc of motion from neutral to external rotation to internal rotation and back to neutral within preset torque limits. Each examiner performed 3 tests on the dominant and nondominant shoulders. Each examiner completed 2 installations.

RESULTS: Testing reliability demonstrated that neither trial, installation, nor observer were significant sources of variation. The maximum standard deviation was 1.3° for total arc of motion and less than 2° for most other measurements. Dominant arm ER was significantly greater than nondominant arm ER (P = 0.02), and dominant arm IR was significantly less than nondominant arm IR (P = 0.00). Mean total rotation was 162°, with no significant differences in total rotation between dominant and nondominant arms (P = 0.34). Mean total arc of motion was 45° greater in female subjects. Differences in total arc of motion between male and female subjects was statistically significant (P < 0.00).

CONCLUSION: This simple, clinical device allows for both inter- and intraobserver reliability measurements of glenohumeral internal and external rotation.

Keywords: glenohumeral range of motion; internal rotation deficit; shoulder

References

  1. Am J Sports Med. 2002 Jan-Feb;30(1):136-51 - PubMed
  2. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2006 Jan;38(1):21-6 - PubMed
  3. Ann Rheum Dis. 2002 Jul;61(7):612-6 - PubMed
  4. Am J Sports Med. 2002 May-Jun;30(3):354-60 - PubMed
  5. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Sep;83(9):1229-34 - PubMed
  6. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1999 May;29(5):262-9; discussion 270-4 - PubMed
  7. Am J Sports Med. 1997 Sep-Oct;25(5):609-13 - PubMed
  8. Am J Sports Med. 2005 May;33(5):693-8 - PubMed
  9. Am J Sports Med. 2002 Jan-Feb;30(1):20-6 - PubMed
  10. Arthroscopy. 2003 May-Jun;19(5):531-9 - PubMed
  11. Phys Ther. 1974 May;54(5):474-83 - PubMed
  12. Acta Orthop Scand. 1994 Aug;65(4):483-4 - PubMed
  13. Am J Sports Med. 1990 Jul-Aug;18(4):366-75 - PubMed
  14. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2002 Dec;34(12):2052-6 - PubMed
  15. J Orthop Res. 2000 Mar;18(2):190-4 - PubMed
  16. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002 Jan-Feb;11(1):40-2 - PubMed
  17. Am J Sports Med. 2009 Mar;37(3):566-70 - PubMed
  18. J Athl Train. 1992;27(1):44-9 - PubMed
  19. Am J Sports Med. 1988 Nov-Dec;16(6):577-85 - PubMed
  20. Am J Sports Med. 1996 May-Jun;24(3):279-85 - PubMed
  21. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1996 Jul-Aug;5(4):299-306 - PubMed
  22. Clin Sports Med. 2000 Jan;19(1):125-58 - PubMed
  23. Am J Sports Med. 1990 Mar-Apr;18(2):134-6 - PubMed
  24. Am J Sports Med. 2000 Sep-Oct;28(5):668-73 - PubMed
  25. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006 Jan-Feb;15(1):67-71 - PubMed
  26. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995 May;77(5):784-98 - PubMed
  27. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1996 Dec;24(6):336-41 - PubMed
  28. Arthroscopy. 2003 Jul-Aug;19(6):641-61 - PubMed
  29. Am J Sports Med. 2006 Mar;34(3):385-91 - PubMed
  30. Orthopedics. 1993 Mar;16(3):349-58 - PubMed
  31. Am J Sports Med. 2011 Feb;39(2):329-35 - PubMed
  32. Sports Health. 2009 Mar;1(2):131-6 - PubMed

Publication Types