Glenohumeral joint kinematics measured by intracortical pins, reflective markers, and computed tomography: A novel technique to assess acromiohumeral distance

How does computed tomography inform our understanding of shoulder kinematics? A structured review

The objective of this structured review was to review how computed tomography (CT) scanning has been used to measure the kinematics of the shoulder. A literature search was conducted using Evidence-based Medicine Reviews (Embase) and PubMed. In total, 29 articles were included in the data extraction process. Forty percent of the studies evaluated healthy participants' shoulder kinematics. The glenohumeral joint was the most studied, followed by the scapulothoracic, acromioclavicular, and sternoclavicular joints. Three-dimensional computed tomography (3DCT) and 3DCT with biplane fluoroscopy are the two primary imaging techniques that have been used to measure shoulder joints' motion under different conditions. Finally, many discrepancies in the reporting of the examined motions were found. Different authors used different perspectives and planes to report similar motions, which results in confusion and misunderstanding of the actual examined motion. The use of 3DCT has been widely used in the examination of shoulder kinematics in a variety of populations with varying methods employed. Future work is needed to extend these methodologies to include more diverse populations, to examine the shoulder complex as a whole, and to standardize their reporting of motion examined to make study to study comparisons possible.

Lumbar segment-dependent soft tissue artifacts of skin markers during in vivo weight-bearing forward–Backward bending

Traditional optical motion capture (OMC) with retroreflective markers is commonly used to measure joint kinematics but was also reported with unavoidable soft tissue artifacts (STAs) when quantifying the motion of the spine. Additionally, the patterns of the STA on the lumbar spine remain unclear. This study aimed to 1) quantify the in vivo STAs of the human lower back in three-dimensional directions during weight-bearing forward–backward bending and 2) determine the effects of the STAs on the calculated flexion angles between the upper and lower lumbar spines and adjacent vertebrae by comparing the skin marker (SM)- and virtual bone marker (VM)-based measurements. Six healthy volunteers were imaged using a biplanar radiographic system, and thirteen skin markers were mounted on every volunteer’s lower back while performing weight-bearing forward–backward bending. The STAs in the anterior/posterior (AP), medial/lateral (ML), and proximal/distal (PD) directions were investigated. The flexion angles between the upper and lower lumbar segments and adjacent intervertebral segments (L2–L5) throughout the cycle were calculated. For all the participants, STAs continuously increased in the AP direction and exhibited a reciprocal trend in the PD direction. During flexion, the STA at the lower lumbar region (L4–L5: 13.5 ± 6.5 mm) was significantly higher than that at the upper lumbar (L1–L3: 4.0 ± 1.5 mm) in the PD direction (p < 0.01). During extension, the lower lumbar (L4–L5: 2.7 ± 0.7 mm) exhibited significantly less STAs than that exhibited by the upper lumbar region (L1–L3: 6.1 ± 3.3 mm) (p < 0.05). The STA at the spinous process was significantly lower than that on both sides in the AP direction (p < 0.05). The present results on STAs, based on dual fluoroscopic measurements in healthy adult subjects, presented an anatomical direction, marker location, and anatomic segment dependency, which might help describe and quantify STAs for the lumbar spine kinematics and thus help develop location- and direction-specific weighting factors for use in global optimization algorithms aimed at minimizing the effects of STAs on the calculation of lumbar joint kinematics in the future.

Does forward head posture change subacromial space in active or passive arm elevation?

Objectives: Forward head posture (FHP) is one of the most common musculoskeletal disorders that appears to affect the shoulder joint through the shared muscles between the head and neck area and the shoulder girdle. The present study compared the acromiohumeral distance between individuals with normal head and neck alignment and those with moderate and severe FHP in active and passive arm elevation.Methods: Based on the craniovertebral angle, 60 volunteers were selected and equally distributed among three groups, including group one with normal head and neck alignment, group two with moderate FHP and group three with severe FHP. The space between the humeral head and the acromion was measured in 10°, 45° and 60° of active and passive arm elevation as the acromiohumeral distance.Results: The acromiohumeral distance was only different between the three groups at 45° arm elevation angle, and this difference was significant between groups one and three. In active and passive arm elevation, increased arm elevation angle reduced the subacromial space significantly. Also, in each arm elevation angle, the subacromial space differed significantly between the active and passive arm elevations.Conclusions: The acromiohumeral distance was significantly lower in the severe FHP group than the group with normal head and neck alignment in the 45° active arm elevation angle, which could be due to the changed tension in tissues between active and passive arm elevation and also the maximum muscle activity in the 45° active arm elevation angle.

Use of optical motion capture for the analysis of normative upper body kinematics during functional upper limb tasks: A systematic review

Quantifying three-dimensional upper body kinematics can be a valuable method for assessing upper limb function. Considering that kinematic model characteristics, performed tasks, and reported outcomes are not consistently standardized and exhibit significant variability across studies, the purpose of this review was to evaluate the literature investigating upper body kinematics in non-disabled individuals via optical motion capture. Specific objectives were to report on the kinematic model characteristics, performed functional tasks, and kinematic outcomes, and to assess whether kinematic protocols were assessed for validity and reliability. Five databases were searched. Studies using anatomical and/or cluster marker sets, along with optical motion capture, and presenting normative data on upper body kinematics were eligible for review. Information extracted included model characteristics, performed functional tasks, kinematic outcomes, and validity or reliability testing. 804 publication records were screened and 20 reviewed based on the selection criteria. Thirteen studies described their kinematic protocols adequately for reproducibility, and 8 studies followed International Society of Biomechanics standards for quantifying upper body kinematics. Six studies assessed their protocols for validity or reliability. While a substantial number of studies have adequately reported their protocols, more systematic work is needed to evaluate the validity and reliability of existing protocols.

Effect of various upper limb multibody models on soft tissue artefact correction: A case study

Soft tissue artefacts (STA) introduce errors in joint kinematics when using cutaneous markers, especially on the scapula. Both segmental optimisation and multibody kinematics optimisation (MKO) algorithms have been developed to improve kinematics estimates. MKO based on a chain model with joint constraints avoids apparent joint dislocation but is sensitive to the biofidelity of chosen joint constraints. Since no recommendation exists for the scapula, our objective was to determine the best models to accurately estimate its kinematics. One participant was equipped with skin markers and with an intracortical pin screwed in the scapula. Segmental optimisation and MKO for 24-chain models (including four variations of the scapulothoracic joint) were compared against the pin-derived kinematics using root mean square error (RMSE) on Cardan angles. Segmental optimisation led to an accurate scapula kinematics (1.1°≤RMSE≤3.3°) even for high arm elevation angles. When MKO was applied, no clinically significant difference was found between the different scapulothoracic models (0.9°≤RMSE≤4.1°) except when a free scapulothoracic joint was modelled (1.9°≤RMSE≤9.6°). To conclude, using MKO as a STA correction method was not more accurate than segmental optimisation for estimating scapula kinematics.

Distance between rotator cuff footprints and the acromion, coracoacromial ligament, and coracoid process during dynamic arm elevations: Preliminary observations

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to provide preliminary measures of the distance between the supraspinatus, infraspinatus, and subscapularis footprints and the acromion, coracoacromial ligament, and coracoid process, during dynamic arm elevations through the entire range-of-motion.

METHODS

Two healthy men performed maximum adduction, flexion, abduction, and extension with the arm internally, neutrally, and externally rotated. The distance between each rotator cuff footprint and the acromion, coracoacromial ligament, and coracoid process was measured from glenohumeral kinematics obtained from markers fitted to intracortical pins combined with the scapular and humeral 3D geometry obtained from CT-scan.

RESULTS

All footprints moved to be less than 10 mm to the acromion, coracoacromial ligament and coracoid process. They got closer to the acromion than to the other parts of the coracoacromial arch. The acromion-supraspinatus and acromion-infraspinatus distances were minimal during abduction and flexion. The acromion-subscapularis distance was minimal when the arm was in external and neutral rotation during both adduction and flexion.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study provides benchmark results of the distance between the rotator cuff footprints and the coracoacromial arch that may guide future clinical research. Pressure transducers should be positioned throughout the coracoacromial arch to provide comprehensive assessment of the compression undergone by the rotator cuff tendons. Common shoulder examination tests, that require flexion and internal rotation movements, may be refined since the supraspinatus footprint was the closest to the coracoacromial arch during abduction. Larger scale investigations may be needed to identify more accurate shoulder examination tests.