Clinical descriptive measures of shoulder range of motion for a healthy, young and physically active cohort

• Main Authors: Vairo Giampietr L, Duffey Michele L, Owens Brett D, Cameron Kenneth L
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: BMC 2012-09-01
• Series: Sports Medicine, Arthroscopy, Rehabilitation, Therapy & Technology
• Subjects: Shoulder; Scapulohumeral; Range of motion; Measurement; Goniometry
• Online Access: http://www.smarttjournal.com/content/4/1/33

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The objective of this innovative research study was to describe clinical shoulder complex range of motion (ROM) measures for a young, healthy, and physically active population. This investigation represents a cross-sectional experiment conducted at a military academy-based sports medicine center. Military cadets with no history of shoulder complex injury were assessed within two months of enrollment in the academy; 548 men (18.8 ± 1.0 yr, 75.2 ± 12.2 kg, 178.3 ± 7.4 cm) and 74 women (18.7 ± 0.9 yr, 63.2 ± 8.9 kg, 165.2 ± 6.9 cm) participated. Descriptive measures included cross-body adduction (CAD), flexion (FLX), external rotation (ER0) with the shoulder complex in adduction and elbow flexed to 90°, internal and external rotation (IR, ER) with the shoulder complex at 90° of abduction and elbow flexed to 90° as well as arc (ARC) of IR-ER using standardized clinical quantification techniques. Bilateral and sex differences were evaluated using dependent and independent t-tests, respectively. Percentiles by arm dominance and sex were also calculated for all ROM measures.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Data were normally distributed. Active and passive ROM measures indicated significant bilateral differences (P < 0.05) except for ARC. Sex differences (P < 0.05) were noted for active and passive CAD, FLX and ER0 for the dominant arm as well as active and passive CAD, FLX and ARC for the non-dominant arm.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These original data provide descriptive measures for shoulder complex ROM excursions, assisting sports medicine practitioners in potentially identifying clinical deficiencies and functional outcomes following shoulder injury.</p>