World Scientific
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at customercare@wspc.com for any enquiries.

ULTRASONIC EVALUATION OF ANTERIOR SHOULDER TRANSLATION IN NORMAL SHOULDERS

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218957703001058Cited by:8 (Source: Crossref)

    Anterior translation in the right shoulders of 23 volunteers was evaluated using ultrasound from an anterior approach with a 10 MHz, 6 cm wide linear transducer. A translatory force of 90 N was used to translate the humeral head in the adduction and internal rotation position, while a translatory force of 60 N was used in the more clinically relevant position of 90° abduction and external rotation position. The overall intra-observer coefficients of variation ranged from 0–13.0% (mean 3.8 ± 2.5%) for examiner I and 0.5–20.9% (mean 5.1 ± 3.9%) for examiner II. The overall inter-observer variation ranged from 0–29.8% (mean 9.3 ± 7.3%). The anterior translation of the humeral head in adduction and internal rotation following 90 N displacement force ranged from -2.6 to 12.9 mm (mean 2.1 ± 3.1 mm) for examiner I and from -4.1 to 4.7 mm (mean 1.1 ± 2.2 mm) for examiner II. The anterior translation of the humeral head in abduction and external rotation following 60 N displacement force ranged from -3.3 to 3.7 mm (mean 0.3 ± 1.9 mm) for examiner I and from -8.3 mm to 4.5 mm (mean -0.7 ± 2.6 mm) for examiner II. The intra-class correlation coefficients (r) for the measured anterior translation between the two examiners for the 2 positions were 0.029 and -0.058 respectively. We concluded that the inter-observer coefficient of variation remained excessive and the agreement in the measured anterior translation between the two examiners was poor. The finding of negative values in the measured anterior translation despite the use of 90 N and 60 N translatory force raises further concerns about the prospective clinical use of this technique at the present moment.