Study Selection: Eligible articles were those written in English that identified surgery, magnetic resonance imaging, or injection as the criterion standard; studied at least one shoulder special ...test; and reported or included data to calculate the paired statistics of sensitivity and specificity for individual tests. The overall diagnostic power of these special tests was determined through the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) and the area under the curve (AUC) for the summary receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve. ...these special tests were evaluated in only one study, often conducted by the originator of the test. ...more examinations into these special tests are warranted to better elucidate their value in diagnosing labral pathologies. The systematic review by Hegedus et al1 reviewed nearly 50 orthopedic special tests of the shoulder and determined there are few tests that provide diagnostic value when evaluating the shoulder for impingement (supraspinatus/empty can or infraspinatus tests), rotator cuff integrity (supine impingement sign, external rotation lag sign, hornblower sign, bear-hug test, and belly press test), glenoid labrum pathologies (Kim, jerk, and biceps load II tests), instability (apprehension, relocation, and anterior release tests), and AC joint pathology (pain with palpation and active compression tests).
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the performance of specific face-mask removal tools during football helmet face-mask retraction using 3-dimensional (3-D) video. DESIGN AND SETTING: Four different tools were ...used: the anvil pruner (AP), polyvinyl chloride pipe cutters (PVC), Face Mask (FM) Extractor (FME), and Trainer's Angel (TA). Subjects retracted a face mask once with each tool. SUBJECTS: Eleven certified athletic trainers served as subjects and were recruited from among local sports medicine professionals. MEASUREMENTS: We analyzed a sample of movement by 3-D techniques during the retraction process. Movement of the head in 3 planes and time to retract the face mask were also assessed. All results were analyzed with a simple repeated-measures one-way multivariate analysis of variance. An overall efficiency score was calculated for each tool. RESULTS: The AP allowed subjects to perform the face-mask removal task the fastest. Face mask removal with the AP was significantly faster than with the PVC and TA and significantly faster with the TA than the PVC. The PVC and AP created significantly more movement than the FME and TA when planes were combined. No significant differences were noted among tools for flexion-extension, rotation, or lateral flexion. The AP had an efficiency score of 14; FME, 15; TA, 18; and PVC, 35. CONCLUSIONS: The subjects performed the face-mask removal task in the least amount of time with the AP. They completed the task with the least amount of combined movement using the FME. The AP and FME had nearly identical overall efficiency scores for movement and time.
OBJECTIVE: To quantify the amount of helmet movement, time for task completion, tool satisfaction, and overall efficiency for various face-mask removal tools during football helmet face-mask removal. ...DESIGN AND SETTING: Each subject performed one trial with the anvil pruner (AP), Face Mask Extractor (FME), PVC pipe cutter (PVC), and Trainer's Angel (TA). Each subject cut through 4 loop straps and removed the face mask while kneeling behind the athlete's head. SUBJECTS: Twenty-nine certified athletic trainers (age = 29.5 +/- 6.2 years, athletic training experience = 6.3 +/- 5.0 years). MEASUREMENTS: Time to complete the task was recorded. Total range of motion and total movement of the helmet were assessed using a 6-camera, 3-dimensional motion-capture system. Satisfaction scores were measured for each subject for each tool. Efficiency scores were calculated using time and total helmet-movement data. RESULTS: When using the FME, subjects were significantly faster than with all other tools (P <.05), and when using the AP and TA, they were significantly faster than with the PVC. No differences were noted between tools in either movement variable. Significant differences were noted for satisfaction (P <.05) for all comparisons except TA versus AP. Efficiency scores were FME, 11.6; AP, 14.3; TA, 14.5; and PVC, 22.9, with lower scores identifying increased efficiency. CONCLUSIONS: In general, subjects using the FME were superior in all variables except the movement variables. Future researchers should assess the removal task using specific protocols to determine whether the tools truly differ in terms of the movement created.
Context:
Closed kinetic chain exercises are reported to provide a more functional rehabilitation outcome.
Objective:
To determine the amount of muscle activity in 4 shoulder muscles during exercise ...on the Cuff Link.
Design:
Repeated measures.
Setting:
Laboratory.
Subjects:
10 men and 10 women, age 18–50.
Intervention:
Subjects performed 3 sets of 5 revolutions on the Cuff Link in non-weight-bearing, partial-weight-bearing, and full-weight-bearing positions.
Main Outcome Measures:
Electromyography data were collected from the upper trapezius, anterior deltoid, serratus anterior, and pectoralis major and were expressed as percentage of maximal isometric contractions.
Results:
Significant differences were found across the weight-bearing conditions for all 4 muscles. Exercise on the Cuff Link required minimal to significant amounts of muscle recruitment.
Conclusions:
Muscle recruitment increases as weight bearing increases during use of the Cuff Link, suggesting an increase in dynamic stabilization of the glenohumeral joint.
Should Helmets Be Worn in Rugby? Swartz, Erik E; Marshall, Stephen W
Athletic training & sports health care,
01/2011, Letnik:
3, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Should Helmets Be Worn in Rugby? Swartz, Erik E.; Marshall, Stephen W.
Athletic training & sports health care,
01/2011, Letnik:
3, Številka:
1
Journal Article
Recenzirano
Clinical Question: Does padded headgear prevent head injury in rugby union football?.
