Department of Health Sciences, Armstrong Atlantic State University, Savannah, GA 31419, USA.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010 Dec;19(8):1175-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.05.021. Epub 2010 Sep 20.
Objective documentation is needed of shoulder internal and external rotator strength using hand-held dynamometry in selected positions commonly used in a clinic. We compared strength measures and unilateral ratios between gender, limbs (dominant, nondominant), and 3 testing positions. We hypothesized that men would be stronger than women, the dominant shoulder would be stronger than the nondominant shoulder, and the seated neutral (0° adduction) and seated 30° abduction, 30° scaption, 30° diagonal (30°-30°-30°) positions would be stronger than the prone at 90°-90° position.
Three positions (prone at 90°, seated at neutral, and seated at 30°-30°-30°) were evaluated in 181 individuals using hand-held dynamometry. Three separate 3-factor (limb by position by gender) analyses of variance were conducted on internal rotation, external rotation, and unilateral ratios.
Although the dominant limb was significantly stronger (P < .001) than the nondominant for internal rotation, there was no difference for external rotation. The external rotators demonstrated significantly greater strength in the prone at 90° position compared with the seated at neutral (P = .001) and seated at 30°-30°-30° (P = .002) positions. The internal rotators demonstrated significantly greater (P = .036) strength in the neutral position than in the prone at 90° position for the women. The unilateral ratio of external rotators/internal rotators ranged from 86% to 99%. For the women, the prone at 90° ratio was significantly greater than seated at neutral (P = .001) and seated at 30°-30°-30° (P = .001) positions. Moderate strength relationships (r = 0.506 to 0.572) were revealed between body mass and all strength measures.
The results of this study provide evidence to interpret normative data, bilateral comparisons and unilateral ratios of the internal/external rotators in the 3 selected positions.
Because there are no differences between the seated at neutral and 30°-30°-30° positions and the advantages it offers, we recommend the 30°-30°-30° position for testing and the initiation of rehabilitation.
使用手持测力计在临床常用的特定位置对肩部内、外旋肌力量进行客观记录是必要的。我们比较了性别、肢体(优势、非优势)和 3 种测试体位之间的力量测量值和单侧比值。我们假设男性比女性更强壮,优势肩比非优势肩更强壮,坐姿中立位(外展 0°)和坐姿 30°外展、30°上举、30°对角(30°-30°-30°)位比俯卧 90°-90°位更强。
181 名个体使用手持测力计评估了 3 种体位(俯卧 90°、坐姿中立位和坐姿 30°-30°-30°)。对内旋、外旋和单侧比值分别进行了 3 次独立的 3 因素(肢体、体位和性别)方差分析。
尽管优势肢体的内旋力量明显强于非优势肢体(P <.001),但外旋无差异。外旋肌在俯卧 90°位的力量明显大于坐姿中立位(P =.001)和坐姿 30°-30°-30°位(P =.002)。女性内旋肌在中立位的力量明显大于俯卧 90°位(P =.036)。外旋肌/内旋肌的单侧比值为 86%至 99%。对于女性,俯卧 90°位的比值明显大于坐姿中立位(P =.001)和坐姿 30°-30°-30°位(P =.001)。身体质量与所有力量测量值之间存在中度强度关系(r = 0.506 至 0.572)。
本研究结果为解释内、外旋肌在 3 种选定体位下的正常数据、双侧比较和单侧比值提供了证据。
由于坐姿中立位和 30°-30°-30°位之间没有差异,且 30°-30°-30°位具有优势,因此我们建议在该体位进行测试和康复治疗。