Timmons Mark K, Lopes-Albers Andrea Diniz, Borgsmiller Lindsey, Zirker Catherine, Ericksen Jeff, Michener Lori A
Interprofessional Polytrauma and Traumatic Brain Injury Rehabilitation, Department of Veterans Affairs, Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center, Richmond, VA 23249, USA.
Clin Biomech (Bristol). 2013 Apr;28(4):395-401. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2013.01.015. Epub 2013 Mar 6.
The empty and full can arm positions are used as diagnostic tests and in therapeutic exercise programs for patients with subacromial impingement syndrome. The adverse effects of these arm positions on the rotator cuff have not been fully described. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the acromio-humeral distance, three-dimensional scapular position, and shoulder pain during maximum isometric contractions in the empty and full can arm positions.
Subjects with subacromial impingement syndrome (n=28) and a matched control group without shoulder pain (n=28) participated. Acromio-humeral distance, scapular/clavicular positions and shoulder pain were measured during maximal isometric contractions in each position.
No difference was found in acromio-humeral distance (P=0.314) between the arm positions or between the groups (P=0.598). The empty can position resulted in greater scapular upward rotation (P<0.001, difference=4.9°), clavicular elevation (P<0.001, difference=2.7°), clavicular protraction (P=0.001, difference=2.5°) and less posterior tilt (P<0.001, difference=3.8°) than the full can position. No differences in the scapular positions were found between the groups. Positive correlations were seen between the scapular positions in the control and not in the subacromial impingement group.
Our results did not show a difference in acromio-humeral distance between the arm positions or groups, indicating that the kinematic differences between the positions are not associated with altered acromio-humeral distance. The increased pain in the EC position might be due to the lack of an association amongst the scapular positions rather than the deficiency of a single scapular motion.
空罐位和满罐位被用作诊断测试以及用于肩峰下撞击综合征患者的治疗性锻炼项目。这些手臂位置对肩袖的不良影响尚未得到充分描述。本研究的目的是比较空罐位和满罐位最大等长收缩时的肩峰 - 肱骨距离、肩胛骨三维位置和肩部疼痛情况。
肩峰下撞击综合征患者（n = 28）和无肩部疼痛的匹配对照组（n = 28）参与研究。在每个位置的最大等长收缩过程中测量肩峰 - 肱骨距离、肩胛骨/锁骨位置和肩部疼痛情况。
在手臂位置之间或组间，肩峰 - 肱骨距离均无差异（P = 0.314）（组间比较P = 0.598）。与满罐位相比，空罐位导致肩胛骨向上旋转更大（P < 0.001，差值 = 4.9°）、锁骨抬高更大（P < 0.001，差值 = 2.7°）、锁骨前伸更大（P = 0.001，差值 = 2.5°）以及后倾更小（P < 0.001，差值 = 3.8°）。组间肩胛骨位置无差异。在对照组中肩胛骨位置之间存在正相关，而在肩峰下撞击组中未发现。
我们的结果未显示手臂位置或组间在肩峰 - 肱骨距离上存在差异，表明这些位置之间的运动学差异与肩峰 - 肱骨距离改变无关。空罐位疼痛增加可能是由于肩胛骨位置之间缺乏关联，而非单一肩胛骨运动不足所致。
