Reliability of isokinetic assessment of shoulder-rotator strength: a systematic review of the effect of position

Details

Ressource 1Request a copy Sous embargo indéterminé.
State: Public
Version: author
License: Not specified
Serval ID
serval:BIB_72259DA9E9E2
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Publication sub-type
Review (review): journal as complete as possible of one specific subject, written based on exhaustive analyses from published work.
Collection
Publications
Title
Reliability of isokinetic assessment of shoulder-rotator strength: a systematic review of the effect of position
Journal
J Sport Rehabil
Author(s)
Edouard P., Samozino P., Julia M., Gleizes Cervera S., Vanbiervliet W., Calmels P., Gremeaux V.
ISSN
1056-6716 (Print)
ISSN-L
1056-6716
Publication state
Published
Issued date
08/2011
Volume
20
Number
3
Pages
367-83
Language
english
Notes
Edouard, Pascal
Samozino, Pierre
Julia, Marc
Gleizes Cervera, Sophie
Vanbiervliet, William
Calmels, Paul
Gremeaux, Vincent
eng
Review
Systematic Review
J Sport Rehabil. 2011 Aug;20(3):367-83. doi: 10.1123/jsr.20.3.367.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Isokinetic assessment of shoulder internal-(IR) and external-rotator (ER) strength is commonly used with many different postures (sitting, standing, or supine) and shoulder positions (frontal or scapular plane with 45 degrees or 90 degrees of abduction). OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review to determine the influence of position on the intersession reliability of the assessment of IR and ER isokinetic strength, to identify the most reliable position, and to determine which isokinetic variable appears to be most stable in intersession reliability. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic literature search through MEDLINE and Pascal Biomed databases was performed in October 2009. Criteria for inclusion were that studies be written in English or French, describe the isokinetic evaluation methods, and describe statistical analysis. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Sixteen studies meeting the inclusion criteria were included. Variable reliability of ER and IR peak torque (PT) were generally reported for all assessment positions; intraclass correlation coefficients were .44-.98 in the seated position with 45 degrees of shoulder abduction, .09-.77 in the seated position with 90 degrees of shoulder abduction, .86-.99 (coefficient of variation: 7.5-29.8%) in the supine position with 90 degrees of shoulder abduction, .82-.84 in the supine position with 45 degrees of shoulder abduction, and .75-.94 in standing. The ER:IR ratio reliability was low for all positions. CONCLUSIONS: The seated position with 45 degrees of shoulder abduction in the scapular plane seemed the most reliable for IR and ER strength assessment. The standing position or a shoulder posture with 90 degrees of shoulder abduction or in the frontal plane must be used with caution given the low reliability for peak torque. Good reliability of ER and IR PT was generally reported, but ER:IR ratio reliability was low.
Keywords
Humans, Muscle Contraction/physiology, Muscle Strength/*physiology, Posture/*physiology, Reproducibility of Results, Rotator Cuff/*physiology, Shoulder/*physiology
Pubmed
Create date
26/11/2019 11:35
Last modification date
06/05/2020 5:26
Usage data