Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMacLean, Kathleen F. E.
dc.contributor.authorChopp, Jaclyn N.
dc.contributor.authorGrewal, Tej-Jaskirat
dc.contributor.authorPicco, Bryan R.
dc.contributor.authorDickerson, Clark R.
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-12 21:34:02 (GMT)
dc.date.available2022-01-12 21:34:02 (GMT)
dc.date.issued2014-02
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2013.09.011
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10012/17868
dc.descriptionThe final publication is available at Elsevier via http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2013.09.011. © 2014. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/en
dc.description.abstractThe shoulder is complex and comprised of many moving parts. Accurately measuring shoulder rhythm is difficult. To classify shoulder rhythm and identify pathological movement, static measures have been the preferred method. However, dynamic measures are also used and can be less burdensome to obtain. The purpose of this paper was to determine how closely dynamic measures represent static measures using the same acromion marker cluster scapular tracking technique. Five shoulder angles were assessed for 24 participants using dynamic and static tracking techniques during humeral elevation in three planes (frontal, scapular, sagittal). ANOVAs were used to identify where significant differences existed for the factors of plane, elevation angle, and tracking technique (static, dynamic raising, dynamic lowering). All factors were significantly different for all shoulder angles (p<0.001), except for elevation plane in scapulothoracic protraction/retraction (p=0.955). Tracking techniques were influential (p<0.001), but the grouped mean differences fell below a clinically relevant 5° benchmark. There was large variation in mean differences of the techniques across individuals. While population averages are similar, individual static and dynamic shoulder assessments may be different. Caution should be taken when dynamic shoulder assessments are performed on individuals, as they may not reflect those obtained in static scapular motion tracking.en
dc.description.sponsorshipNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council || Canada Foundation for Innovationen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherElsevieren
dc.relation.ispartofseriesJournal of Electromyography and Kinesiology;
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectbiomechanicsen
dc.subjectscapular motionen
dc.subjectshoulder rhythmen
dc.subjectstatic and dynamic movementen
dc.titleThree-dimensional comparison of static and dynamic scapular motion tracking techniquesen
dc.typeArticleen
dcterms.bibliographicCitationMacLean, K. F. E., Chopp, J. N., Grewal, T.-J., Picco, B. R., & Dickerson, C. R. (2014). Three-dimensional comparison of static and dynamic scapular motion tracking techniques. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology, 24(1), 65–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelekin.2013.09.011en
uws.contributor.affiliation1Faculty of Applied Health Sciencesen
uws.contributor.affiliation2Kinesiologyen
uws.typeOfResourceTexten
uws.peerReviewStatusRevieweden
uws.scholarLevelFacultyen
uws.scholarLevelGraduateen


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

UWSpace

University of Waterloo Library
200 University Avenue West
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1
519 888 4883

All items in UWSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

DSpace software

Service outages