Shoulder motion during tennis serve: dynamic and radiological evaluation based on motion capture and magnetic resonance imaging

Charbonnier, Caecilia; Chagué, Sylvain; Kolo, Frank; Lädermann, Alexandre

doi:10.1007/s11548-014-1135-4

Cited by 29 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For each phase, the mean and maximal values of the compressive, shearing and total glenohumeral contact forces were calculated. In line with a previous study (Charbonnier et al, 2015), the direction of the glenohumeral contact forces was expressed by dividing the glenoid into eight sections (Figure 2). Then, the percentage of glenohumeral contact forces inside each of the eight sections was computed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…Playing tennis applies repeated high loads onto the upper limb joints, especially onto the shoulder complex (Elliott, Fleisig, Nicholls, & Escamilia, 2003). If the serve places the tennis player at the highest risk for impingements at the shoulder (Charbonnier, Chague, Kolo, & Ladermann, 2015), repeated powerful forehand drives may also be a cause of shoulder problems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Delft Shoulder and Elbow model implemented with a tennis racket The glenoid was divided into eight sectors based onCharbonnier et al (2015) in order to represent the direction of the glenohumeral forces: 1-anteriorSuperior,…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Glenohumeral contact force during flat and topspin tennis forehand drives

Blache

Creveaux

Dumas

et al. 2016

Sports Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The primary role of the shoulder joint in tennis forehand drive is at the expense of the loadings undergone by this joint. Nevertheless, few studies investigated glenohumeral (GH) contact forces during forehand drives. The aim of this study was to investigate GH compressive and shearing forces during the flat and topspin forehand drives in advanced tennis players. 3D kinematics of flat and topspin forehand drives of 11 advanced tennis players were recorded. The Delft Shoulder and Elbow musculoskeletal model was implemented to assess the magnitude and orientation of GH contact forces during the forehand drives. The results showed no differences in magnitude and orientation of GH contact forces between the flat and topspin forehand drives. The estimated maximal GH contact force during the forward swing phase was 3573 ± 1383 N, which was on average 1.25 times greater than during the follow-through phase, and 5.8 times greater than during the backswing phase. Regardless the phase of the forehand drive, GH contact forces pointed towards the anterior-superior part of the glenoid therefore standing for shearing forces. Knowledge of GH contact forces during real sport tasks performed at high velocity may improve the understanding of various sport-specific adaptations and causative factors for shoulder problems.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Glenohumeral contact force during flat and topspin tennis forehand drives

Blache

Creveaux

Dumas

et al. 2016

Sports Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Shoulder kinematics was computed from the recorded markers’ trajectories using a validated biomechanical model which accounted for skin motion artifact. [ 11 , 20 ] The model was based on a patient-specific kinematic chain using the shoulder 3D models reconstructed from the CT data and a global optimization algorithm with loose constraints on joint translations (accuracy: translational error < 3 mm, rotational error < 4°). Figure 2 shows examples of computed postures.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does surgery for instability of the shoulder truly stabilize the glenohumeral joint?

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the fact that surgery is commonly used to treat glenohumeral instability, there is no evidence that such treatment effectively corrects glenohumeral translation. The purpose of this prospective clinical study was to analyze the effect of surgical stabilization on glenohumeral translation.Glenohumeral translation was assessed in 11 patients preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively following surgical stabilization for anterior shoulder instability. Translation was measured using optical motion capture and computed tomography.Preoperatively, anterior translation of the affected shoulder was bigger in comparison to the normal contralateral side. Differences were significant for flexion and abduction movements (P < 0.001). Postoperatively, no patients demonstrated apprehension and all functional scores were improved. Despite absence of apprehension, postoperative anterior translation for the surgically stabilized shoulders was not significantly different from the preoperative values.While surgical treatment for anterior instability limits the chance of dislocation, it does not seem to restore glenohumeral translation during functional range of motion. Such persistent microinstability may explain residual pain, apprehension, inability to return to activity and even emergence of dislocation arthropathy that is seen in some patients. Further research is necessary to better understand the causes, effects, and treatment of residual microinstability following surgical stabilization of the shoulder.

show abstract

“…Shoulder injuries are the second most common cause of leaving professional tennis competition and account for approximately 4%-17% of all tennis injuries (100)(101)(102). The biomechanics and phases of the tennis serve are similar to that of overhead throwing, and therefore similar patterns of injury arise (103)(104)(105). GIRD, internal impingement, and the associated increasing frequency, intensity, and velocity of competitive youth baseball playing (96).…”

Section: Shoulder Injuries In Overhead Sports Other Than Baseballmentioning

confidence: 99%

Shoulder Injuries in the Overhead-Throwing Athlete: Epidemiology, Mechanisms of Injury, and Imaging Findings

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The unparalleled velocity achieved by overhead throwers subjects the shoulder to extreme forces, resulting in both adaptive changes and pathologic findings that can be detected at imaging. A key biomechanical principle of throwing is achieving maximum external rotation, which initially leads to adaptive changes that may result in a pathologic cascade of injuries. In addition to the well-established concepts of glenohumeral internal rotation deficit and internal impingement, osseous and soft-tissue injuries of the shoulder unique to overhead athletes are illustrated. The epidemiology and biomechanics of throwing injuries are reviewed, and examples from the authors' institutional experience with competitive, collegiate, and professional baseball players are provided to demonstrate the constellation of unique imaging findings seen in overhead throwing athletes. Given the widespread popularity of baseball, and other sports relying on overhead throwing motions at all playing levels from recreational to professional, it is important for radiologists in various practice settings to be familiar with the special mechanisms, locations, and types of shoulder injuries seen in the overhead throwing population. RSNA, 2018.

show abstract

Shoulder motion during tennis serve: dynamic and radiological evaluation based on motion capture and magnetic resonance imaging

Cited by 29 publications

References 35 publications

Glenohumeral contact force during flat and topspin tennis forehand drives

Glenohumeral contact force during flat and topspin tennis forehand drives

Does surgery for instability of the shoulder truly stabilize the glenohumeral joint?

Shoulder Injuries in the Overhead-Throwing Athlete: Epidemiology, Mechanisms of Injury, and Imaging Findings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About