测量肩胛骨肌牵缩最大等距力的替代方法。

Duane A Williams, James R Roush, George J Davies, Todd S Ellenbecker, Mitchell J Rauh
{"title":"测量肩胛骨肌牵缩最大等距力的替代方法。","authors":"Duane A Williams,&nbsp;James R Roush,&nbsp;George J Davies,&nbsp;Todd S Ellenbecker,&nbsp;Mitchell J Rauh","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The importance of the scapular stabilizing muscles has led to an increased interest in quantitative measurements of their strength. Few studies have measured isometric or concentric isokinetic forces. Additionally, limited reports exist on the reliability of objective measures for testing scapular protraction and retraction muscle strength or scapular testing that does not involve the glenohumeral joint.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the reliability of four new methods of measuring the maximal isometric strength of key scapular stabilizing muscles for the actions of protraction and retraction, both with and without the involvement of the glenohumeral (GH) joint.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Isobex® stationary tension dynamometer was used to measure the maximal isometric force (kg) on thirty healthy females (ages 22-26 years). Three measures were taken for each method that was sequentially randomized for three separate testing sessions on three nonconsecutive days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intraclass correlations (ICC2,3) for intrasession reliability and (ICC3,3) for intersession reliability ranged from 0.95 to 0.98, and 0.94 to 0.96 respectively. The standard errors of measurement (95% confidence interval [CI]) were narrow. Scatter grams for both protraction and retraction testing methods demonstrated a significant relationship, 0.92 for protraction (95% CI 0.83 to 0.96) and 0.93 for retraction (95% CI 0.87 to 0.97). Bland-Altman plots indicated good agreement between the two methods for measuring protraction strength but a weaker agreement for the two methods measuring retraction strength.</p><p><strong>Discussion/conclusion: </strong>The four new methods assessed in this study indicate reliable options for measuring scapular protraction or retraction isometric strength with or without involving the GH joint for young healthy females.</p>","PeriodicalId":88617,"journal":{"name":"North American journal of sports physical therapy : NAJSPT","volume":"4 4","pages":"200-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2953350/pdf/najspt-04-200.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alternative methods for measuring scapular muscles protraction and retraction maximal isometric forces.\",\"authors\":\"Duane A Williams,&nbsp;James R Roush,&nbsp;George J Davies,&nbsp;Todd S Ellenbecker,&nbsp;Mitchell J Rauh\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The importance of the scapular stabilizing muscles has led to an increased interest in quantitative measurements of their strength. Few studies have measured isometric or concentric isokinetic forces. Additionally, limited reports exist on the reliability of objective measures for testing scapular protraction and retraction muscle strength or scapular testing that does not involve the glenohumeral joint.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine the reliability of four new methods of measuring the maximal isometric strength of key scapular stabilizing muscles for the actions of protraction and retraction, both with and without the involvement of the glenohumeral (GH) joint.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The Isobex® stationary tension dynamometer was used to measure the maximal isometric force (kg) on thirty healthy females (ages 22-26 years). Three measures were taken for each method that was sequentially randomized for three separate testing sessions on three nonconsecutive days.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Intraclass correlations (ICC2,3) for intrasession reliability and (ICC3,3) for intersession reliability ranged from 0.95 to 0.98, and 0.94 to 0.96 respectively. The standard errors of measurement (95% confidence interval [CI]) were narrow. Scatter grams for both protraction and retraction testing methods demonstrated a significant relationship, 0.92 for protraction (95% CI 0.83 to 0.96) and 0.93 for retraction (95% CI 0.87 to 0.97). Bland-Altman plots indicated good agreement between the two methods for measuring protraction strength but a weaker agreement for the two methods measuring retraction strength.</p><p><strong>Discussion/conclusion: </strong>The four new methods assessed in this study indicate reliable options for measuring scapular protraction or retraction isometric strength with or without involving the GH joint for young healthy females.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":88617,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"North American journal of sports physical therapy : NAJSPT\",\"volume\":\"4 4\",\"pages\":\"200-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2953350/pdf/najspt-04-200.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"North American journal of sports physical therapy : NAJSPT\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"North American journal of sports physical therapy : NAJSPT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:肩胛骨稳定肌的重要性导致了对其强度定量测量的兴趣增加。很少有研究测量等距或同心等速力。此外,关于测试肩胛骨伸缩肌力量或不涉及肩胛骨关节的肩胛骨测试的客观测量方法的可靠性的报道有限。目的:确定四种测量肩胛骨关键稳定肌在有或无肩胛骨关节牵伸和牵伸时最大等距强度的新方法的可靠性。方法:采用Isobex®固定式张力测力仪测量30例健康女性(22-26岁)的最大等距力(kg)。每种方法都采取了三个措施,这些方法在三个非连续的日子里依次随机分为三个单独的测试阶段。结果:会话内信度的类内相关性(ICC2,3)和会话间信度的类内相关性(ICC3,3)分别为0.95 ~ 0.98和0.94 ~ 0.96。测量标准误差(95%置信区间[CI])较窄。拉伸和收缩测试方法的散点图显示了显著的相关性,拉伸为0.92 (95% CI 0.83至0.96),收缩为0.93 (95% CI 0.87至0.97)。Bland-Altman图显示两种方法测量拉伸强度的一致性较好,但两种方法测量收缩强度的一致性较弱。讨论/结论:本研究评估的四种新方法为年轻健康女性测量肩胛骨伸缩等距强度提供了可靠的选择,无论是否涉及GH关节。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Alternative methods for measuring scapular muscles protraction and retraction maximal isometric forces.

Alternative methods for measuring scapular muscles protraction and retraction maximal isometric forces.

Alternative methods for measuring scapular muscles protraction and retraction maximal isometric forces.

Alternative methods for measuring scapular muscles protraction and retraction maximal isometric forces.

Background: The importance of the scapular stabilizing muscles has led to an increased interest in quantitative measurements of their strength. Few studies have measured isometric or concentric isokinetic forces. Additionally, limited reports exist on the reliability of objective measures for testing scapular protraction and retraction muscle strength or scapular testing that does not involve the glenohumeral joint.

Objective: To determine the reliability of four new methods of measuring the maximal isometric strength of key scapular stabilizing muscles for the actions of protraction and retraction, both with and without the involvement of the glenohumeral (GH) joint.

Methods: The Isobex® stationary tension dynamometer was used to measure the maximal isometric force (kg) on thirty healthy females (ages 22-26 years). Three measures were taken for each method that was sequentially randomized for three separate testing sessions on three nonconsecutive days.

Results: Intraclass correlations (ICC2,3) for intrasession reliability and (ICC3,3) for intersession reliability ranged from 0.95 to 0.98, and 0.94 to 0.96 respectively. The standard errors of measurement (95% confidence interval [CI]) were narrow. Scatter grams for both protraction and retraction testing methods demonstrated a significant relationship, 0.92 for protraction (95% CI 0.83 to 0.96) and 0.93 for retraction (95% CI 0.87 to 0.97). Bland-Altman plots indicated good agreement between the two methods for measuring protraction strength but a weaker agreement for the two methods measuring retraction strength.

Discussion/conclusion: The four new methods assessed in this study indicate reliable options for measuring scapular protraction or retraction isometric strength with or without involving the GH joint for young healthy females.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信