↓ Skip to main content

The effect of the rotator interval on glenohumeral kinematics during abduction

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effect of the rotator interval on glenohumeral kinematics during abduction
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12891-016-0898-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Babak Haghpanah, Kempland C. Walley, Andreas Hingsammer, Ethan R. Harlow, Ramin Oftadeh, Ashkan Vaziri, Arun J. Ramappa, Joseph P. DeAngelis, Ara Nazarian

Abstract

The rotator interval (RI) has been exploited as a potentially benign point of entry into the glenohumeral (GH) joint. Bounded by the supraspinatus, subscapularis and coracoid process of the scapula, the RI is believed to be important in the shoulder's soft tissue balancing and function. However, the role of the RI in shoulder kinematics is not fully understood. The purpose of this study is to describe the effect of the RI on GH motion during abduction of the arm. Six shoulders from three cadaveric torsos were studied to assess the impact of changes in the RI during abduction under four conditions: Intact (Baseline), Opened, Repaired (repaired with side-to-side tissue approximation, no overlap) and Tightened (repaired with 1 cm overlap). For each group, the GH translation and area under the Curve (AUC) were measured during abduction using an intact cadaveric shoulder (intact torso). GH kinematics varied in response to each intervention and throughout the entire abduction arc. Opening the RI caused a significant change in GH translation. The Repair and Tightened groups behaved similarly along all axes of GH motion. The RI is central to normal GH kinematics. Any insult to the tissue's integrity alters the shoulder's motion throughout abduction. In this model, closing the RI side-to-side has the same effect as tightening the RI. Since suture closure may offer the same benefit as tightening the RI, clinicians should consider this effect when treating patients with shoulder laxity. This investigation provides an improved perspective on the role of the RI on GH kinematics during abduction. When managing shoulder pathology, surgeons should consider how these different methods of RI closure affect the joint's motion. In different circumstances, the surgical approach to the RI can be tailored to address each patient's specific needs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 12%
Researcher 5 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 14 27%
Unknown 11 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 18 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 15%
Engineering 6 12%
Sports and Recreations 4 8%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 14 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 February 2016.
All research outputs
#14,247,377
of 22,844,985 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#2,125
of 4,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,863
of 396,720 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#42
of 80 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,844,985 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,046 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,720 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 80 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.