0
Technical Brief

Measurement and Description of Three-Dimensional Shoulder Range of Motion With Degrees of Freedom Interactions

[+] Author and Article Information
Diane Haering

Laboratory of Simulation and Movement Modeling,
Department of Kinesiology,
Université de Montréal,
1700 rue Jacques Tétreault,
Laval, QC H7N 0B6, Canada
e-mail: diane.haering@umontreal.ca

Maxime Raison

ÉcolePolytechnique de Montréal and Centre de
Réadaptation Marie Enfant – Sainte-Justine UHC,
Research & Engineering Chair
Applied in Pediatrics (RECAP),
5200 rue Bélanger, office GR-123,
Montreal, QC H1T 1C9, Canada
e-mail: maxime.raison@polymtl.ca

Mickael Begon

Laboratory of Simulation and Movement Modeling,
Department of Kinesiology,
Université de Montréal,
1700 rue Jacques Tétreault,
Laval, QC H7N 0B6, Canada
e-mail: mickael.begon@umontreal.ca

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received October 29, 2013; final manuscript received May 2, 2014; accepted manuscript posted May 14, 2014; published online June 3, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Zong-Ming Li.

J Biomech Eng 136(8), 084502 (Jun 03, 2014) (6 pages) Paper No: BIO-13-1511; doi: 10.1115/1.4027665 History: Received October 29, 2013; Revised May 02, 2014; Accepted May 14, 2014

The shoulder is the most mobile joint of the human body due to bony constraint scarcity and soft tissue function unlocking several degrees of freedom (DOF). Clinical evaluation of the shoulder range of motion (RoM) is often limited to a few monoplanar measurements where each DOF varies independently. The main objective of this study was to provide a method and its experimental approach to assess shoulder 3D RoM with DOF interactions. Sixteen participants performed four series of active arm movements with maximal amplitude consisting in (1) elevations with fixed arm axial rotations (elevation series), (2) axial rotations at different elevations (rotation series), both in five planes of elevation, (3) free arm movements with the instruction to fill the largest volume in space while varying hand orientation (random series), and (4) a combination of elevation and rotation series (overall series). A motion analysis system combined with an upper limb kinematic model was used to estimate the 3D joint kinematics. Thoracohumeral Euler angles with correction were chosen to represent rotations. The angle-time-histories were treated altogether to analyze their 3D interaction. Then, all 3D angular poses were included into a nonconvex hull representing the RoM space accounting for DOF interactions. The effect of series of movements (n = 4) on RoM volumes was tested with a one-way repeated-measures ANOVA followed by Bonferroni posthoc analysis. A normalized 3D RoM space was defined by including 3D poses common to a maximal number of participants into a hull of average volume. A significant effect of the series of movements (p < 0.001) on the volumes of thoracohumeral RoM was found. The overall series measured the largest RoM with an average volume of 3.46 ± 0.89 million cubic degrees. The main difference between the series of movements was due to axial rotation. A normalized RoM hull with average volume was found by encompassing arm poses common to more than 50% of the participants. In general, the results confirmed and characterized the complex 3D interaction of shoulder RoM between the DOF. The combination of elevation and rotation series (overall series) is recommended to fully evaluate shoulder RoM. The normalized 3D RoM hull is expected to provide a reliable reference to evaluate shoulder function in clinical research and for defining physiologic continuous limits in 3D shoulder computer simulation models.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Labriola, J. E., Lee, T. Q., Debski, R. E., and Mcmahon, P. J., 2005, “Stability and Instability of the Glenohumeral Joint: The Role of Shoulder Muscles,” J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 14(1, Suppl.), pp. S32–S38. [CrossRef]
Karduna, A. R., Williams, G. R., Iannotti, J. P., and Williams, J. L., 1996, “Kinematics of the Glenohumeral Joint: Influences of Muscle Forces, Ligamentous Constraints, and Articular Geometry,” J. Orthop. Res., 14(6), pp. 986–993. [CrossRef]
Kamper, D. G., and Rymer, W. Z., 1999, “Effects of Geometric Joint Constraints on the Selection of Final Arm Posture During Reaching: A Simulation Study,” Exp. Brain Res., 126(1), pp. 134–138. [CrossRef]
Huchez, A., Haering, D., Holvoët, P., Barbier, F., and Begon, M., 2013, “Local Versus Global Optimal Sports Techniques in a Group of Athletes,” Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. (in press).
Gutiérrez, S., Levy, J. C., Frankle, M. A., Cuff, D., Keller, T. S., Pupello, D. R., and Lee, III, W. E., 2008, “Evaluation of Abduction Range of Motion and Avoidance of Inferior Scapular Impingement in a Reverse Shoulder Model,” J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 17(4), pp. 608–615. [CrossRef]
Klopčar, N., Tomšič, M., and Lenarčič, J., 2007, “A Kinematic Model of the Shoulder Complex to Evaluate the Arm-Reachable Workspace,” J. Biomech., 40(1), pp. 86–91. [CrossRef]
Maurel, W., and Thalmann, D., 2000, “Human Shoulder Modeling Including Scapulo-Thoracic Constraint and Joint Sinus Cones,” Comput. Graph., 24(2), pp. 203–218. [CrossRef]
Illyés, Á., and Kiss, R. M., 2006, “Method for Determining the Spatial Position of the Shoulder With Ultrasound-Based Motion Analyzer,” J. Electromyogr. Kinesiol., 16(1), pp. 79–88. [CrossRef]
Namdari, S., Yagnik, G., Ebaugh, D. D., Nagda, S., Ramsey, M. L., Williams, Jr., G. R., and Mehta, S., 2012, “Defining Functional Shoulder Range of Motion for Activities of Daily Living,” J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 21(9), pp. 1177–1183. [CrossRef]
Karduna, A. R., Mcclure, P. W., Michener, L. A., and Sennett, B., 2001, “Dynamic Measurements of Three-Dimensional Scapular Kinematics: A Validation Study,” ASME J. Biomech. Eng., 123(2), pp. 184–190. [CrossRef]
Hamming, D., Braman, J. P., Phadke, V., Laprade, R. F., and Ludewig, P. M., 2012, “The Accuracy of Measuring Glenohumeral Motion With a Surface Humeral Cuff,” J. Biomech., 45(7), pp. 1161–1168. [CrossRef]
Roux, E., Bouilland, S., Godillon-Maquinghen, A. P., and Bouttens, D., 2002, “Evaluation of the Global Optimisation Method Within the Upper Limb Kinematics Analysis,” J. Biomech., 35(9), pp. 1279–1283. [CrossRef]
Barnes, C. J., Van Steyn, S. J., and Fischer, R. A., 2001, “The Effects of Age, Sex, and Shoulder Dominance on Range of Motion of the Shoulder,” J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 10(3), pp. 242–246. [CrossRef]
Herrington, L., and Horsley, I., 2013, “Effects of Latissimus Dorsi Length on Shoulder Flexion in Canoeists, Swimmers, Rugby Players, and Controls,” J. Sport Health Sci., 3(1), pp. 60–63. [CrossRef]
Charteris, J., and Taves, C., 1978, “The Process of Habituation to Treadmill Walking: A Kinematic Analysis,” Percept. Mot. Skills, 47(2), pp. 659–666. [CrossRef]
Barton, J. G., and Lees, A., 1997, “An Application of Neural Networks for Distinguishing Gait Patterns on the Basis of Hip-Knee Joint Angle Diagrams,” Gait Posture, 5(1), pp. 28–33. [CrossRef]
Jackson, M., Michaud, B., Tétreault, P., and Begon, M., 2012, “Improvements in Measuring Shoulder Joint Kinematics,” J. Biomech., 45(12), pp. 2180–2183. [CrossRef]
Fohanno, V., Lacouture, P., and Colloud, F., 2013, “Improvement of Upper Extremity Kinematics Estimation Using a Subject-Specific Forearm Model Implemented in a Kinematic Chain,” J. Biomech., 46(6), pp. 1053–1059. [CrossRef]
Lempereur, M., Leboeuf, F., Brochard, S., Rousset, J., Burdin, V., and Rémy-Néris, O., 2010, “In Vivo Estimation of the Glenohumeral Joint Centre by Functional Methods: Accuracy and Repeatability Assessment,” J. Biomech., 43(2), pp. 370–374. [CrossRef]
Wu, G., Van Der Helm, F. C. T., Veeger, H. E. J., Makhsous, M., Van Roy, P., Anglin, C., Nagels, J., Karduna, A. R., Mcquade, K., Wang, X., Werner, F. W., and Buchholz, B., 2005, “ISB Recommendation on Definitions of Joint Coordinate Systems of Various Joints for the Reporting of Human Joint Motion—Part II: Shoulder, Elbow, Wrist and Hand,” J. Biomech., 38(5), pp. 981–992. [CrossRef]
O'Brien, J. F., Bodenheimer, R. E., Brostow, G. J., and Hodgins, J. K., 2000, “Automatic Joint Parameter Estimation From Magnetic Motion Capture Data,” Proceedings of Graphics Interface, pp. 53–60.
Ehrig, R. M., Heller, M. O., Kratzenstein, S., Duda, G. N., Trepczynski, A., and Taylor, W. R., 2011, “The SCoRE Residual: A Quality Index to Assess the Accuracy of Joint Estimations,” J. Biomech., 44(7), pp. 1400–1404. [CrossRef]
Begon, M., Wieber, P.-B., and Yeadon, M. R., 2008, “Kinematics Estimation of Straddled Movements on High Bar From a Limited Number of Skin Markers Using a Chain Model,” J. Biomech., 41(3), pp. 581–586. [CrossRef]
Lundgren, J., 2010, “Inpolyhedron—Are Points Inside a Volume?,” MATLAB Central File Exchange, retrieved Apr. 12, 2012, http:// www.mathworks.com/matlabcentral/fileexchange/28851-alpha-shapes
Hughes, P. C., Green, R. A., and Taylor, N. F., 2012, “Measurement of Subacromial Impingement of the Rotator Cuff,” J. Sci. Med. Sport, 15(1), pp. 2–7. [CrossRef]
Kuhn, J. E., Huston, L. J., Soslowsky, L. J., Shyr, Y., and Blasier, R. B., 2005, “External Rotation of the Glenohumeral Joint: Ligament Restraints and Muscle Effects in the Neutral and Abducted Positions,” J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 14(1,Supplement), pp. S39–S48. [CrossRef]
Jobe, C. M., and Lannotti, J. P., 1995, “Limits Imposed on Glenohumeral Motion by Joint Geometry,” J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 4(4), pp. 281–285. [CrossRef]
Codman, E. A., 1934, The Shoulder: Rupture of the Supraspinatus Tension and Other Lesions in or About the Subacronial Bursa, Thomas Todd Company, Boston.
Masjedi, M., Lovell, C., and Johnson, G. R., 2011, “Comparison of Range of Motion and Function of Subjects With Reverse Anatomy Bayley–Walker Shoulder Replacement With Those of Normal Subjects,” Human Movement Sci., 30(6), pp. 1062–1071. [CrossRef]
Keener, J. D., Steger-May, K., Stobbs, G., and Yamaguchi, K., 2010, “Asymptomatic Rotator Cuff Tears: Patient Demographics and Baseline Shoulder Function,” J. Shoulder Elbow Surg., 19(8), pp. 1191–1198. [CrossRef]
See “Supplemental Data” tab for the Appendix section in the ASME Digital Collection for mesh file including 3D coordinates of the points defining average RoM hull. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Description of arm movement series relatively to the thorax with the arm reference frame and the corresponding axes of rotation. (a) “Elevation” series. (b) “Rotation” series. The seven vertical planes of elevation are seen from above. The maximal external, neutral, and maximal internal rotations of the arm are represented during elevation. “Plateau” indicates that elevation is stopped at 30 deg, 60 deg, 90 deg, 120 deg, 150 deg, and maximal elevation, while a maximal external–internal rotation is performed. Notes: For clarity, the arm is represented with extended elbow during internal–external rotations; however, in the reality, the elbow was bent at about 90 deg. The addition sign indicates that each combination of the right hand side is performed in all seven vertical planes of elevation.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Example of hull construction for the first series of movements (elevations). (a) Poses during evolution of the movement defined by 3D angles. (b) and (c) Tetrahedra and nonconvex hull that encompasses all the poses, respectively.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

(a) Individual and (b) average thoracohumeral RoM volumes, represented by 3D angle (ψ)–angle (θ)–angle (φ) hulls. Notes: The upper and lower boxes represent the thoracohumeral RoM from Klopčar's model [6] and Barnes's data [13], respectively. Vertical lines and planes indicate planes in which characteristic anatomical movement are realized.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Slices of average RoM volume for all series compared to the literature data. Subplots indicate the 2D rotation–elevation interaction every 45 deg of plane of elevation.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Boxplots representing the effects of movement series on maximal shoulder RoM volume with paired t-test. The series showing significant differences with each other are mentioned after one (p < 0.05) or two (p < 0.01) asterisks. The red crosses represent outliers.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In