A quantitative method for evaluating inferior glenohumeral joint stiffness using ultrasonography

被引:3
|
作者
Tsai, Wen-Wei [1 ]
Lee, Ming-Yih [1 ]
Yeh, Wen-Lin [2 ]
Cheng, Shih-Chung [3 ]
Soon, Kok-Soon [4 ]
Lei, Kin Fong [1 ]
Lin, Wen-Yen [5 ]
机构
[1] Chang Gung Univ, Grad Inst Med Mechatron, Tao Yuan 333, Taiwan
[2] Chang Gung Mem Hosp, Dept Orthoped, Tao Yuan, Taiwan
[3] Natl Taiwan Sport Univ, Grad Inst Coaching Sci, Guishan Township, Taiwan
[4] Chang Gung Univ, Dept Mech Engn, Tao Yuan 333, Taiwan
[5] Chang Gung Univ, Dept Elect Engn, Tao Yuan 333, Taiwan
关键词
Shoulder; Laxity; Stiffness; Ultrasonography; Subluxation; SHOULDER SUBLUXATION; ASYMPTOMATIC SHOULDERS; HUMERUS TRANSLATION; HEMIPLEGIA; ABDUCTION; LAXITY; PAIN;
D O I
10.1016/j.medengphy.2011.10.007
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Subluxation of the affected shoulder in post-stroke patients is associated with nerve disorders and muscle fatigue. Clinicians must be able to accurately and reliably measure inferior glenohumeral subluxation in patients to provide appropriate treatment. However, quantitative methods for evaluating the laxity and stiffness of the glenohumeral joint (GHJ) are still being developed. The aim of this study was to develop a new protocol for evaluating the laxity and stiffness of the inferior GHJ using ultrasonography under optimal testing conditions and to investigate changes in the GHJ from a commercially available humerus brace and shoulder brace. Multistage inferior displacement forces were applied to create a glide between the most cephalad point on the visible anterosuperior surface of the humeral head and coracoid process in seven healthy volunteers. GHJ stiffness was defined as the slope of the linear regression line between the glides and different testing loads. The testing conditions were defined by different test loading mechanisms (n = 2), shoulder constraining conditions (n = 2), and loading modes (n = 4). The optimal testing condition was defined as the condition with the least residual variance of measured laxity to the calculated stiffness under different testing loads. A paired t-test was used to compare the laxity and stiffness of the inferior GHJ using different braces. No significant difference was identified between the two test loading mechanisms (t = 0.218, p = 0.831) and two shoulder constraining conditions (t = -0.235, p = 0.818). We concluded that ultrasonographic laxity measurements performed using a pulley set loading mechanism was as reliable as direct loading. Additionally, constraining the unloaded shoulder was proposed due to the lower mean residual variance value. Moreover, pulling the elbow downward with loading on the upper arm was suggested, as pulling the elbow downward with the elbow flexed and loading on the forearm may overestimate stiffness and pain in the inferior GHJ at the loading point due to friction between the wide belt and skin. Furthermore, subjects wearing a humerus brace with a belt, which creates the effect of lifting the humerus toward the acromion, had greater GHJ stiffness compared to subjects wearing a shoulder brace without a belt to lift the humerus under the proposed testing conditions. This study provides experimental evidence that shoulder braces may reduce GHJ laxity under an external load, implying that the use of a humeral brace can prevent subluxation in post-stroke patients. The resulting optimal testing conditions for measuring the laxity and stiffness of the GHJ is to constrain the unloaded shoulder and bend the loaded arm at the elbow with loading on the upper arm using a pulley system. (C) 2011 IPEM. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:236 / 240
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Clinical evaluation of the anterior translation of glenohumeral joint using ultrasonography: an intra- and inter-rater reliability study
    Joseph, Leonard H.
    Hussain, Rizuana I.
    Pirunsan, Ubon
    Naicker, Amaramalar S.
    Htwe, Ohnmar
    Paungmali, Aatit
    ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA ET TRAUMATOLOGICA TURCICA, 2014, 48 (02) : 169 - 174
  • [32] Quantitative analysis of traction in the glenohumeral joint. In vivo radiographic measurements
    Gokeler, A
    van Paridon-Edauw, GH
    DeClercq, S
    Matthijs, O
    Dijkstra, PU
    MANUAL THERAPY, 2003, 8 (02) : 97 - 102
  • [33] Predicting mechanical load of the glenohumeral joint, using net joint moments
    Praagman, M
    Stokdijk, M
    Veeger, HEJ
    Visser, B
    CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS, 2000, 15 (05) : 315 - 321
  • [34] QUANTITATIVE STUDY OF STIFFNESS IN KNEE-JOINT
    SUCH, CH
    UNSWORTH, A
    WRIGHT, V
    DOWSON, D
    ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES, 1975, 34 (04) : 286 - 291
  • [35] Glenohumeral joint laxity and stiffness in the functional throwing position of high school baseball pitchers
    Crawford, SD
    Sauers, EL
    JOURNAL OF ATHLETIC TRAINING, 2006, 41 (01) : 52 - 59
  • [36] Ultrasonography Guided Glenohumeral Injection Using an Anterior Approach: A Cadaveric Study
    Kim, Min Wook
    Kim, Joon-Sung
    Ko, Young Jin
    Lee, Won Ihl
    Kim, Jae Min
    Yun, Jong Soo
    ANNALS OF REHABILITATION MEDICINE-ARM, 2009, 33 (02): : 215 - 218
  • [37] A Performance Evaluating Platform for Variable Stiffness Exoskeleton Joint
    Ma, Zhuo
    Chen, Baojun
    Liu, Jianbin
    Zuo, Siyang
    INTELLIGENT ROBOTICS AND APPLICATIONS, ICIRA 2021, PT I, 2021, 13013 : 709 - 716
  • [38] Glenohumeral joint reconstruction using statistical shape modeling
    Huang, Yichen
    Robinson, Dale L.
    Pitocchi, Jonathan
    Lee, Peter Vee Sin
    Ackland, David C.
    BIOMECHANICS AND MODELING IN MECHANOBIOLOGY, 2022, 21 (01) : 249 - 259
  • [39] Glenohumeral joint reconstruction using statistical shape modeling
    Yichen Huang
    Dale L. Robinson
    Jonathan Pitocchi
    Peter Vee Sin Lee
    David C. Ackland
    Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology, 2022, 21 : 249 - 259
  • [40] Numerical approximation of vehicle joint stiffness by using response surface method
    Lee, S.B.
    Park, J.R.
    Yim, H.J.
    International Journal of Automotive Technology, 2002, 3 (03) : 117 - 122