CORRECTION OF SHOULDER IMPINGEMENT MEASURED BY ULTRASONOGRAPHY IS ASSOCIATED WITH FAVORABLE OUTCOME OF REHABILITATION.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One factor likely involved in the shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS) is improper dynamic stabilization of the humeral head. This can result in abnormal reduction of the acromio-humeral distance (AHD) during shoulder movement. PURPOSE To evaluate the relationship between the functional outcome of a standardized rehabilitation program and the variations of the AHD during active shoulder abduction in patients suffering from SIS. METHODS Subjects 30–50 years old with SIS were included after rotator cuff tears were excluded by ultrasonography (US). US measurement of the AHD at 0, 45 and 60° of active abduction was assessed before and after a 4 week rehabilitation program. Intraclass correlation for interobserver reliability of the AHD measurement was previously shown to be ≥ 0.86 for the different shoulder positions. Pain, function and quality of life were assessed by the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC). The rehabilitation program consisted of manual and exercise therapy aimed at the shoulder and scapula. RESULTS A positive correlation (r=0,95; p = 0,013) was observed between improvement of the WORC score and the reduction of the AHD narrowing between 0 and 45° of active abduction following rehabilitation (figure 1). Similar results were observed at 60° (r=0,96; p = 0,01).Figure: No Caption AvailableCONCLUSION In this limited sample, a strong positive relationship was found between the reduction of variation in the AHD measured by US during the first portion of abduction and improvement of symptoms following a standardized rehabilitation protocol. This is consistent with other studies that have outlined the importance of humeral head depression in the first portion of elevation. (FD is supported by REPAR, FRSQ and OPPQ)
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".