Simple Method of Evaluating the Range of Shoulder Motion Using Body Parts Yun, Yeo-Hon; Jeong, Byeong-Jin; Seo, Myeong-Jae; Shin, Sang-Jin;
Background: The purpose of this study is to assess the range of shoulder motion using an indirect evaluation method without physical examinations of patients based on questionnaires regarding several specific arm postures referenced by patient's own body parts. Methods: Nine criteria of specific shoulder motion including 4 forward flexion, 2 external rotation, and 3 internal rotation were decided as reference position which can represent a certain shoulder motion. Flexion contains postures such as lifting arm to waist-height, shoulder-height, eye-height, and raising arm above head with arm touching ears. External rotation comprises grasping ears and placing hands on back of the head. Vertebral height in internal rotation is determined by calculating the samples' motions, which are holding on to trouser belts, opposite-elbow, and scapula. These postures are included in questionnaires for patients to evaluate the validity and effectiveness of this indirect method. Results: The range of flexion was ( to ), ( to ), ( to ), and ( to ) when arms go up to waist, shoulder, eye, and high vertically. Range of external rotation was ( to ) when grasping ears and ( to ) with the hands on the back of the head. Range of internal rotation was L4 when placing trouser belts, T12 for holding opposite elbow, and T9 for reaching scapula. The mismatch rates of flexion, external rotation, and internal rotation were 11.6%, 9.6%, and 7.8%. Conclusions: The range of shoulder motion using this method is expected to be applied to an established shoulder scoring system which included shoulder motion evaluation item.
Shoulder joint;Range of motion;Self-assessment;Telephone;
Murray DW, Britton AR, Bulstrode CJ. Loss to follow-up matters. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79(2):254-7.
Kolber MJ, Vega F, Widmayer K, Cheng MS. The reliability and minimal detectable change of shoulder mobility measurements using a digital inclinometer. Physiother Theory Pract. 2011;27(2):176-84.
Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.
Norquist BM, Goldberg BA, Matsen FA 3rd. Challenges in evaluating patients lost to follow-up in clinical studies of rotator cuff tears. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000;82(6):838-42.
Perkins JJ, Sanson-Fisher RW. An examination of self-and telephone-administered modes of administration for the Australian SF-36. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(11):969-73.
Hoffmann T, Russell T, Cooke H. Remote measurement via the Internet of upper limb range of motion in people who have had a stroke. J Telemed Telecare. 2007;13(8):401-5.
Carter CW, Levine WN, Kleweno CP, Bigliani LU, Ahmad CS. Assessment of shoulder range of motion: introduction of a novel patient self-assessment tool. Arthroscopy. 2008;24(6):712-7.
Shin SH, Ro du H, Lee OS, Oh JH, Kim SH. Within-day reliability of shoulder range of motion measurement with a smartphone. Man Ther. 2012;17(4):298-304.
Godfrey J, Hamman R, Lowenstein S, Briggs K, Kocher M. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the simple shoulder test: psychometric properties by age and injury type. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16(3):260-7.
Wakabayashi I, Itoi E, Minagawa H, et al. Does reaching the back reflect the actual internal rotation of the shoulder? J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006;15(3):306-10.
Ginn KA, Cohen ML, Herbert RD. Does hand-behind-back range of motion accurately reflect shoulder internal rotation? J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006;15(3):311-4.