scholarly journals Soft Tissue Mobilization and Stretching for Shoulder in CrossFitters: A Randomized Pilot Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 575
Author(s):  
Marcos Jusdado-García ◽  
Rubén Cuesta-Barriuso
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Internal Rotation ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Average Weight ◽  
Average Height ◽  
Shoulder Injury ◽  
Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Deficit ◽  
Posterior Shoulder ◽  
Soft Tissue Mobilization

Background. The shoulder in CrossFit should have a balance between mobility and stability. Glenohumeral internal rotation deficit and posterior shoulder stiffness are risk factors for overhead shoulder injury. Objective. To determine the effectiveness of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization and horizontal adduction stretch in CrossFit practitioners’ shoulders. Methods: Twenty-one regular CrossFitters were allocated to experimental (stretching with isometric contraction and instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization) or control groups (instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization). Each session lasted 5 min, 2 days a week, over a period of 4 weeks. Shoulder internal rotation and horizontal adduction (digital inclinometer), as well as posterior shoulder stretch perception (Park scale), were evaluated. Shapiro–Wilk test was used to analyze the distribution of the sample. Parametric Student’s t-test was used to obtain the intragroup differences. The inter- and intra-rater differences were calculated using a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA). Results. Average age was 30.81 years (SD: 5.35), with an average height of 178 (SD: 7.93) cm and average weight of 82.69 (SD: 10.82) kg. Changes were found in the experimental group following intervention (p < 0.05), and when comparing baseline and follow-up assessments (p < 0.05) in all variables. Significant differences were found in the control group following intervention (p < 0.05), in right horizontal adduction and left internal rotation. When comparing the perception of internal rotation and horizontal adduction in both groups, significant differences were found. Conclusions. Instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization can improve shoulder horizontal adduction and internal rotation. An instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization technique yields the same results alone as those achieved in combination with post-isometric stretch with shoulder adduction.

scholarly journals Soft Tissue Mobilization and Stretching for Shoulder in CrossFitters: a Randomized Pilot Study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos Jusdado-García ◽  
Ruben Cuesta-Barriuso
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Internal Rotation ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Shoulder Injury ◽  
Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Deficit ◽  
Posterior Shoulder ◽  
Student’S T ◽  
Soft Tissue Mobilization

Background. Shoulder in CrossFit should have a balance between mobility and stability. Glenohumeral internal rotation deficit and posterior shoulder stiffness are risk factors for overhead shoulder injury. Objective. To determine the effectiveness of instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization and horizontal adduction stretch in CrossFit practitioners&rsquo; shoulders. Methods: Twenty-one regular CrossFitters were allocated to experimental (stretching with isometric contraction and instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization) or control group (instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization). Each session lasted 5 minutes, 2 days a week, over a period of 4 weeks. Shoulder internal rotation and horizontal adduction (digital inclinometer), and posterior shoulder stretch perception (Park scale) were evaluated. Shapiro-Wilk test was used to analyze the distribution of the sample. Parametric student's t-test was used to obtain the intragroup differences. The inter- and intra-rater differences were calculated using a repeated measures ANOVA. Results. Changes were found in the experimental group following intervention (p &lt; 0.05), and when comparing baseline and follow-up assessments (p &lt; .05) in all variables. Significant differences were found in the control group following intervention (p &lt; 0.05), in right horizontal adduction and left internal rotation. When comparing perception of internal rotation and horizontal adduction in both groups in the three assessments significant differences were found. Conclusions. Instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization can improve shoulder horizontal adduction and internal rotation. An instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization technique yields the same results alone as those achieved in combination with post-isometric stretch with shoulder adduction.

scholarly journals Acute effect of posterior deltoid static stretching on Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Deficit in elite swimmers after competition. A randomized trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (6_suppl3) ◽  
pp. 2325967118S0004
Author(s):  
M Solana-Tramunt ◽  
R Lopez-Vidriero ◽  
E Lopez-Vidriero
Keyword(s):  
Internal Rotation ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Sagittal Plane ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
National Level ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Overhead Athletes ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Deficit ◽  
Experimental Group

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine whether a static stretch of posterior deltoid could reduce the glenohumeral internal rotation deficit (GIRD) and the total arc of movement deficit (TAMD) in professional swimmers after competition. Methods: Participants: A total of 74 professional swimmers aged from 16-33 years volunteered to participated in the study. Their competition experience were more than 2 years at national level. All the subjects were informed in written and verbal form and signed their informed consent before being assessed. Design and procedures: A randomized repeated measures design was used to assess the glenohumeral rotation in 3 moments: prior to the race, just after finishing their trial and after performing a static passive stretch of posterior deltoid muscles of 90-sec. In randomized order the computer selected 20 subjects as a control group (CG) who didn’t perform the stretching. The experimental group (EG) included 54 swimmers. The glenohumeral internal and external rotation (IR and ER) were recorded by a video camera (IPhone 6 S, version 10.1), in sagittal plane, with the center of the screen at shoulder high. Subjects were laying on supine position over a massage table, with the glenohumeral joint at 90° of abduction, the elbow at 90° of flexion, and the researcher controlling the scapula movements by pushing the shoulder over coracoid apophasis. The App Thechnique (Ubersense ©) was used to measure the glenohumeral rotation degrees between the vertical line (controlled by a plumb) and the forearm segment. Results: The multifactorial ANOVA showed that there were significant differences on GIRD and TAMD between the experimental and the control group performing the stretching F(2,70)=49.150, P=0.000, η2p=0.992. The experimental group reduced the GIRD a16.2% and the TAMD a 6.7%. The dominant IR mean values changed significantly from 66.3±12.5 to 79.2±10.4 degrees for EG ( P=0.00) and non-significantly for CG, from 74.6±12.7 to 77.6±13.9 degrees ( P=0.11). The dominant TAM means changed significantly in EG from 173.2±16.8 to 192.0±17.0 degrees ( P=0.00) and non- significantly for CG 181.5±21.7 to 188.2±23.3 degrees ( P=0.12). Conclusion: To apply a static passive stretching on posterior deltoid during 90-sec reduced GIRD and the TAMD in professional swimmers after competition, which suggest a reduced risk of shoulder injury in these overhead athletes.

Does soft tissue mobilization assist static stretching to improve hamstring flexibility? A randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shibili Nuhmani
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Knee Extension ◽  
Repeated Measure ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Static Stretching ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Hamstring Flexibility ◽  
Soft Tissue Mobilization ◽  
Experimental Group

AbstractObjectivesObjective of the study is to investigate whether Soft tissue mobilization (STM) can assist with static stretching to improve hamstring flexibly.MethodsThe design of the study was repeated measure design. The study was conducted at the physical therapy laboratory of Jamia Hamdard University, New Delhi. Participants included 78 healthy males with hamstring tightness, randomly assigned to either the control group (static stretching) or the experimental group (STM and static stretching). The experimental group received five sets of four different STM techniques, followed by two sets of 30-s static stretches 3 days per week over the course of 12 weeks. The control group received 5 min of sham ultrasound with an inactive probe prior to static stretching. Active knee extension test (AKE) was the outcome measure.ResultsBoth groups showed significant improvement in AKE compared with the baseline measurements. With ingroup analysis showed a significant difference in AKE across all measured time periods (weeks 4, 8, and 12) with pre-test in both groups (p<0.05). No significant difference in AKE improvement was found between groups (p>0.05).ConclusionThe results of this study show that STM prior to static stretching does not significantly improve hamstring flexibility among healthy individuals. Although this study cannot be generalized, the results may be useful for evidence-based practice in the management of hamstring tightness.

scholarly journals The Biomechanics of Shoulder Movement with Implications for Shoulder Injury in Table Tennis: A Minireview

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Liang Li ◽  
Feng Ren ◽  
Julien S. Baker
Keyword(s):  
Internal Rotation ◽  
Clinical Treatment ◽  
Table Tennis ◽  
Shoulder Injuries ◽  
Shoulder Injury ◽  
Tennis Players ◽  
Future Studies ◽  
Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Deficit ◽  
Shoulder Movement ◽  
Injury Mechanisms

A high proportion of shoulder injuries in table tennis players are common, which is both a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. An understanding of the interaction between biomechanical function of the shoulder and mechanisms of shoulder injuries in table tennis players is necessary to prevent injury and to conduct clinical treatment of the shoulder as soon as possible. The purpose of this minireview was to select the available evidence on the biomechanical characteristics of shoulder movement and potential relationships with various shoulder injuries that are common in table tennis players. Five studies revealed interesting biomechanical characteristics of shoulder movement patterns in table tennis players: large internal rotation torque, an increased torsion-rotation movement, and a greater angular velocity of internal rotation were found. Two studies were noted that were related to specific shoulder injury: glenohumeral internal rotation deficit (GIRD) and impingement syndrome. Unfortunately, it is difficult to draw conclusions on the mechanisms of shoulder injury in table tennis players due to the little evidence available that has investigated shoulder injury mechanisms based on biomechanical characteristics. Future studies should focus on the potential relationship between the biomechanical characteristics of the shoulder and injury prevalence to provide valuable reference data for clinical treatment.

Measurement of Glenohumeral Internal Rotation in Asymptomatic Tennis Players and Swimmers

2009 ◽  
Vol 37 (5) ◽  
pp. 1017-1023 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renato Rangel Torres ◽  
João Luiz Ellera Gomes
Keyword(s):  
Internal Rotation ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Level Of Evidence ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Tennis Players ◽  
Glenohumeral Internal Rotation Deficit ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Overhead Sports ◽  
The Difference

Background Glenohumeral internal rotation deficit, often diagnosed in players of overhead sports, has been associated with the development of secondary shoulder lesions. Hypothesis Asymptomatic players of different overhead sports will exhibit variable degrees of glenohumeral internal rotation deficit. Study Design Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods Fifty-four asymptomatic male volunteers (108 shoulders) divided into 3 groups (tennis players, swimmers, control group) underwent measurements of glenohumeral internal and external rotation using clinical examination with scapular stabilization. Measurements of dominant and nondominant shoulders were compared within and between groups. Glenohumeral internal rotation deficit (GIRD) was defined as the difference in internal rotation between the nondominant and dominant shoulders. Results In tennis players, mean GIRD was 23.9° ± 8.4° (P < .001); in swimmers, 12° ± 6.8° (P < .001); and in the control group, 4.9° ± 7.4° (P = .035). Dominant shoulders showed significant difference between all groups, and the difference in internal rotation of the dominant shoulder between the group of tennis players in comparison with the control group (27.6°, P < .001) was greater than the difference in internal rotation of the dominant shoulder found in the group of swimmers compared with the control group (17.9°, P < .001). Between tennis players and swimmers, the difference in internal rotation of the dominant shoulder was 9.7° (P = .002). Conclusion Dominant limbs showed less glenohumeral internal rotation than the nondominant limbs in all groups, with the deficit in the group of tennis players about twice the deficit found for swimmers. Mean difference between limbs in the control group was less than 5°, which is within normal parameters according to most studies. There were statistically significant differences between all groups when dominant shoulders were compared with each other, differences that were not compensated by external rotation gain. Tennis players had the least range of motion, followed by swimmers.

scholarly journals The Comparison of Instrument-Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilization and Self-Stretch Measures to Increase Shoulder Range of Motion in Overhead Athletes: A Critically Appraised Topic

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 385-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Hussey ◽  
Alex E. Boron-Magulick ◽  
Tamara C. Valovich McLeod ◽  
Cailee E. Welch Bacon
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Range Of Motion ◽  
Internal Rotation ◽  
Proper Function ◽  
Clinical Question ◽  
Bottom Line ◽  
Overhead Athletes ◽  
Shoulder Range Of Motion ◽  
Soft Tissue Mobilization ◽  
Shoulder Range

Clinical Scenario: Shoulder range of motion (ROM) in throwing athletes relies on a balance of mobility and stability to maintain proper function and health that, if disrupted, can lead to shoulder injury. There have been several studies that address the relationship between ROM deficits and overhead injuries; however, it may be unclear to clinicians which interventions are most effective for increasing ROM in the glenohumeral joints of overhead athletes. Clinical Question: In overhead athletes who have deficient shoulder ROM, is instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) more effective at acutely increasing ROM over the course of a patient’s treatment when compared with self-stretching? Summary of Key Findings: A thorough literature review yielded 3 studies relevant to the clinical question, and all 3 studies were included. Two articles found a significant increase in acute ROM when compared with a self-stretch measure. All 3 articles showed increases in internal rotation and horizontal adduction, and 1 study reported an increase in total arc of shoulder ROM. Clinical Bottom Line: There is moderate evidence to support the use of IASTM to acutely increase ROM in the glenohumeral joint of overhead athletes. Clinicians should be aware of the variability with recommended treatment times; however, positive results have been seen with treatments lasting 5 to 6 minutes per treatment region. There is no consensus for treatment intensity, and certain IASTM tools require certification. Strength of Recommendation: Grade B evidence exists that IASTM is more effective at increasing shoulder ROM (ie, internal rotation, horizontal adduction, external rotation, total arc of motion) in overhead athletes than self-stretching measures.

Support Force Measures of Midsized Men in Seated Positions

2006 ◽  
Vol 129 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamara Reid Bush ◽  
Robert P. Hubbard
Keyword(s):  
Standard Deviation ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Average Weight ◽  
Average Height ◽  
Shear Forces ◽  
Normal Forces ◽  
Repeated Measures Analysis ◽  
Support Force ◽  
Inclination Angles ◽  
Four Levels

Two areas not well researched in the field of seating mechanics are the distribution of normal and shear forces, and how those forces change with seat position. The availability of these data would be beneficial for the design and development of office, automotive and medical seats. To increase our knowledge in the area of seating mechanics, this study sought to measure the normal and shear loads applied to segmental supports in 12 seated positions, utilizing three inclination angles and four levels of seat back articulation that were associated with automotive driving positions. Force data from six regions, including the thorax, sacral region, buttocks, thighs, feet, and hand support were gathered using multi-axis load cells. The sample contained 23 midsized subjects with an average weight of 76.7kg and a standard deviation of 4.2kg, and an average height of 1745mm with a standard deviation of 19mm. Results were examined in terms of seat back inclination and in terms of torso articulation for relationships between seat positions and support forces. Using a repeated measures analysis, significant differences (p<0.05) were identified for normal forces relative to all inclination angles except for forces occurring at the hand support. Other significant differences were observed between normal forces behind the buttocks, pelvis, and feet for torso articulations. Significant differences in the shear forces occurred under the buttocks and posterior pelvis during changes in seat back inclination. Significant differences in shear forces were also identified for torso articulations. These data suggest that as seat back inclination or torso articulation change, significant shifts in force distribution occur.

scholarly journals Deep Cervical Muscle Exercise Versus Soft Tissue Mobilization In Non-Specific Neck Pain

2021 ◽  
pp. 89-95
Author(s):  
Ni Komang Ayu Juni Antari ◽  
Made Hendra Satria Nugraha ◽  
I Made Niko Winaya ◽  
Putu Rama Adhityadharma
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Neck Pain ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Ultrasound Therapy ◽  
Muscle Exercise ◽  
Cervical Muscle ◽  
Neck Disability ◽  
Study Participants ◽  
Soft Tissue Mobilization ◽  
Combined Intervention

Background: Neck pain is a common health problem in the working population. When studied by the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), the problems that arise in non-specific neck pain include: neck pain, limited joint motion, and decreased functional ability in carrying out daily activities. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of combination ultrasound therapy (UST) and deep cervical muscle exercise (DCME) versus combination ultrasound therapy (UST) and soft tissue mobilization (STM) on non-specific neck pain. Methods: This research was experimental with a randomized pre-test and post-test control group design, in which the study participants were divided into two groups randomly. The study participants were 20 people who were divided into the control group (n = 10) who were given the combined intervention of UST and DCME while the treatment group (n = 10) were given the combined intervention of UST and STM. Therapeutic evaluation measurement tools include: pain scale in the form of numeric rating scale and neck disability in the form of neck disability index. The research was carried out in the independent physiotherapy practice in Denpasar and Badung. The intervention was given 3 times in 3 weeks. Results: The results showed a decrease in neck pain and disability in each intervention group (p <0.05). However, there were no significant differences when compared between groups. Conclusion: Based on these results, it can be concluded that the combination of UST and DCME has the same results as the combination of UST and STM in reducing neck pain and disability in non-specific neck pain.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document