Bradley Helen, Pierpoint Lauren
Howard Head Sports Medicine Vail Health.
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation University of Utah.
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2023 Aug 1;18(4):977-988. doi: 10.26603/001c.83938. eCollection 2023.
Normative data is useful for comparing measured values of strength with population norms and can avoid the issues associated with limb symmetry index. The available normative shoulder strength values are limited by constraints on research designs and variability in subject groups which prevents this data being successfully extrapolated to the greater population.
The purpose of this study was to establish normative isometric strength values for various movements of the shoulder that are specific to function and rotator cuff strength. A secondary goal of this study was to analyze the effect of age, gender, weight, height, activity level and arm dominance on shoulder strength.
Observational cohort study.
Subjects in four age groups (20-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59) were included in this study-200 males (40.0 ± 11.6 years, 179.1 ± 6.5 cm, 81 ± 13.0 kg) and 200 females (40.1 ± 11.5 years, 165.3 ± 7.4sm, 64.4 ± 11.6 kg). Bilateral isometric strength measurements were taken with a handheld dynamometer testing seven shoulder movements. Tables of normative strength data were constructed. Multivariate analyses were performed to analyze the effects of age, gender, weight, height and activity level on isometric shoulder strength.
Men were stronger than women (p<0.001). Age was not associated with most strength measures with the exception of dominant arm abduction (p<0.004), non-dominant arm abduction (p<0.028) and non-dominant arm scapular plane abduction (p<0.004) which had a negative association with strength. Weight was positively associated with strength (p<0.001). Activity level was positively associated with all strength measures (p<0.05) except dominant sided abduction (p=0.056). There were no statistically significant differences between dominant and non-dominant sides.
This normative data may be useful to the clinician, as it permits a standard against which to compare shoulder strength for various age groups. Clinicians can have confidence that the uninvolved limb, if symptom free, can be used as an adequate benchmark for strength measures.
Level 3©The Author(s).
标准数据有助于将力量测量值与总体标准进行比较,并可避免与肢体对称指数相关的问题。现有的肩部力量标准值受到研究设计的限制和受试者群体变异性的影响,这使得这些数据无法成功外推至更广泛的人群。
本研究的目的是建立针对肩部各种特定功能运动和肩袖力量的等长力量标准值。本研究的第二个目标是分析年龄、性别、体重、身高、活动水平和手臂优势对肩部力量的影响。
观察性队列研究。
本研究纳入了四个年龄组(20 - 29岁、30 - 39岁、40 - 49岁、50 - 59岁)的受试者——200名男性(40.0 ± 11.6岁,179.1 ± 6.5厘米,81 ± 13.0千克)和200名女性(40.1 ± 11.5岁,165.3 ± 7.4厘米,64.4 ± 11.6千克)。使用手持测力计对七个肩部运动进行双侧等长力量测量。构建了标准力量数据表。进行多变量分析以分析年龄、性别、体重、身高和活动水平对等长肩部力量的影响。
男性比女性更强壮(p<0.001)。除优势臂外展(p<0.004)、非优势臂外展(p<0.028)和非优势臂肩胛平面外展(p<0.004)与力量呈负相关外,年龄与大多数力量测量指标无关。体重与力量呈正相关(p<0.001)。活动水平与所有力量测量指标呈正相关(p<0.05),但优势侧外展除外(p = 0.056)。优势侧和非优势侧之间无统计学显著差异。
该标准数据可能对临床医生有用,因为它提供了一个可用于比较各年龄组肩部力量的标准。临床医生可以确信,如果未受累肢体无症状,可将其用作力量测量的合适基准。
3级©作者。