Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Proprioception in total, hemi- and reverse shoulder arthroplasty in 3D motion analyses: a prospective study

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of the study was to assess proprioception after shoulder arthroplasty. Twenty-six patients were enrolled who underwent total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) (n = 13) or hemi-arthroplasty (n = 8) for shoulder osteoarthritis or reversed arthroplasty (n = 5) for cuff tear arthropathy. All patients were examined before the operation and then again six months thereafter in a motion analysis study with an active angle-reproduction (AAR) test. In all groups the AAR deteriorated at 60° flexion (from 5.5° [SD 2.8] to 7.6° [SD 2.7]; p = 0.007) and at 30° external rotation (ER) (from 6.5° [SD 3.6] to 7.3° [SD 4.8°]; p = 0.023) six months after surgery. In the subgroup of TSA, there was deterioration at 30° ER (p = 0.036). Otherwise, there were no significant changes within or among the subgroups. Proprioception, assessed by the AAR test, remained unchanged or deteriorated six months after shoulder arthroplasty. This might be related to the reduced pain or to the relatively short follow-up period.

Résumé

Le but de cette étude est d’évaluer la proprioceptivité des prothèses d’épaule. 26 patients ont bénéficié d’une arthroplastie totale (TSA) (n = 13) ou d’une prothèse intermédiaire hémi-arthroplastie (n = 8). Tous les patients présentaient une arthrose de l’épaule, enfin une arthroplastie inversée de type Grammont a été mise en place chez 5 patients pour des lésions associées de la coiffe. L’âge moyen était de 68,8 ans, SD 10,1 avec 20 femmes et 6 hommes. Les patients ont été examinés avant l’intervention et à six mois post-opératoire avec analyse de la mobilité à l’aide d’un test de reproduction angulaire (AAR) et comparaison avec un groupe contrôle de sujets sain.s Le test AAR s’est dégradé à 60° de flexion (5,5° à 7,6° p = 0.007) à 30° rotation externe (6,5° à 7,3° p = 0.023) six mois après la chirurgie. Dans le sous groupe des prothèses totales cette détérioration se fait à 30° RE (p = 0,036). Il n’y a pas de différence significative entre tous les sous groupes. La proprioception qui peut être évaluée par le test AAR a un aspect inchangé ou s’est dégradé six mois après la mise en place de la prothèse. Tout ceci est secondaire à la diminution de la douleur, à la libération tissulaire durant l’intervention et/ou à la période d’hospitalisation relativement courte.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Carman AB, Milburn PD (2006) Determining rigid body transformation parameters from ill-conditioned spatial marker co-ordinates. J Biomech 39:1778–1786

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Chiari L, Della CU, Leardini A, Cappozzo A (2005) Human movement analysis using stereophotogrammetry. Part 2: instrumental errors. Gait Posture 21:197–211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Constant CR, Murley AH (1987) A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 160–164

  4. Cuomo F, Birdzell MG, Zuckerman JD (2005) The effect of degenerative arthritis and prosthetic arthroplasty on shoulder proprioception. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14:345–348

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Deshmukh AV, Koris M, Zurakowski D, Thornhill TS (2005) Total shoulder arthroplasty: long-term survivorship, functional outcome, and quality of life. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14:471–479

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Doorenbosch CA, Harlaar J, Veeger DH (2003) The globe system: an unambiguous description of shoulder positions in daily life movements. J Rehabil Res Dev 40:147–155

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gamage SS, Lasenby J (2002) New least squares solutions for estimating the average centre of rotation and the axis of rotation. J Biomech 35:87–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Niessen MH, Veeger DH, Koppe PA, Konijnenbelt MH, van Dieen J, Janssen TW (2008) Proprioception of the shoulder after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 89:333–338

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Orfaly RM, Rockwood CA Jr., Esenyel CZ, Wirth MA (2003) A prospective functional outcome study of shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis with an intact rotator cuff. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 12:214–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Potzl W, Thorwesten L, Gotze C, Garmann S, Steinbeck J (2004) Proprioception of the shoulder joint after surgical repair for instability: a long-term follow-up study. Am J Sports Med 32:425–430

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Raiss P, Rettig O, Wolf S, Loew M, Kasten P (2007) Range of motion of shoulder and elbow in activities of daily life in 3D motion analysis. Z Orthop Unfall 145:493–498

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. van de Sande MA, Brand R, Rozing PM (2006) Indications, complications, and results of shoulder arthroplasty. Scand J Rheumatol 35:426–434

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Walch G, Boulahia A, Boileau P, Kempf JF (1998) Primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: clinical and radiographic classification. The Aequalis Group. Acta Orthop Belg 64(Suppl 2):46–52

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wu G, van der Helm FC, Veeger HE, Makhsous M, Van Roy P, Anglin C, Nagels J, Karduna AR, McQuade K, Wang X, Werner FW, 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 38:981–992

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Schlierbacher Landstr. 200a, 69118, Heidelberg, Germany

    Philip Kasten, Michael Maier, Oliver Rettig, Patric Raiss, Sebastian Wolf & Markus Loew

Authors
  1. Philip Kasten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael Maier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Oliver Rettig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Patric Raiss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sebastian Wolf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Markus Loew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philip Kasten.

Additional information

The study was supported by a grant of the Orthopaedic Hospital of the University of Heidelberg and the “Deutsche Arthrosehilfe e.V.”.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kasten, P., Maier, M., Rettig, O. et al. Proprioception in total, hemi- and reverse shoulder arthroplasty in 3D motion analyses: a prospective study. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 33, 1641–1647 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0666-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0666-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation