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

Détails

Ressource 1Demande d'une copie Sous embargo indéterminé.
Accès restreint UNIL
Etat: Public
Version: de l'auteur⸱e
Licence: Non spécifiée
ID Serval
serval:BIB_72259DA9E9E2
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Sous-type
Synthèse (review): revue aussi complète que possible des connaissances sur un sujet, rédigée à partir de l'analyse exhaustive des travaux publiés.
Collection
Publications
Titre
Reliability of isokinetic assessment of shoulder-rotator strength: a systematic review of the effect of position
Périodique
J Sport Rehabil
Auteur⸱e⸱s
Edouard P., Samozino P., Julia M., Gleizes Cervera S., Vanbiervliet W., Calmels P., Gremeaux V.
ISSN
1056-6716 (Print)
ISSN-L
1056-6716
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
08/2011
Volume
20
Numéro
3
Pages
367-83
Langue
anglais
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.
Résumé
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.
Mots-clé
Humans, Muscle Contraction/physiology, Muscle Strength/*physiology, Posture/*physiology, Reproducibility of Results, Rotator Cuff/*physiology, Shoulder/*physiology
Pubmed
Création de la notice
26/11/2019 12:35
Dernière modification de la notice
06/05/2020 6:26
Données d'usage