Shoulder Dislocation
Conditions
Keywords
Motion-Triggered Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation-Enhanced Strength Training
Brief summary
The successful application of treatment protocols using motion-triggered neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) for treatment-resistant functional posterior shoulder instability was recently demonstrated. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the concept of a motion-triggered NMES training protocol through objective clinical outcome parameters and its impact on external rotational (ER) shoulder strength and throwing velocity in healthy, elite-level handball players.
Detailed description
The aim of this study is to evaluate the concept of a motion-triggered NMES training protocol through objective clinical outcome parameters and its impact on external rotational (ER) shoulder strength and throwing velocity in healthy, elite-level handball players. It is hypothesized that a 6-week motion-triggered NMES shoulder strengthening training protocol in elite-level handball players would lead to an increase in throwing velocity due to an improved motor ability and ER shoulder strength.
Interventions
OTHERMotion-triggered NMES training protocol
Experimental group subjects undergo a motion-triggered NMES shoulder strengthening training program (3x/week, 30 minutes for 6 weeks) using the Shoulder Pacemaker (NCS Lab Srl, Modena, Italy), a motion activated stimulation device to strengthen muscular disbalances. This is accomplished through varying neuromuscular electrical stimulation intensity based on the angle of motion of the arm producing subtetanic contraction and provoking supraspinal neural adaptations. Electrode placement: electrode 1, inferior to the scapular spine (infraspinatus, teres minor, + posterior deltoid); electrode 2, medial to the medial scapula border (lower trapezius + rhomboids) . Sets x repetitions: 3x20 Levels: Level 1-3; Exercise 1: L1: Supported row, L2: Front raises in 45°, L3 Front raises (thumbs up) Exercise 2: L1: Resisted front raises, L2: Crossbody resisted raises, L3: Crossbody; forehand swing; Exercise 3: L1: Rear dealt fly, L2: Single arm resisted row, L3: Underhand volleyball
OTHERNon-Motion-triggered NMES training protocol
Arm Description: Subjects of the control group undergo a conventional standardized strength training program (3x/week, 30 minutes for 6 weeks) with concentric, eccentric, and functional training exercises.
Sponsors
Austrian Research Group for Regenerative and Orthopedic Medicine
Sportorthopädie Zentrum in Wien Hietzing
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
DOUBLE (Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
Masking description
Study group allocation is performed in a randomized and examiner-blinded fashion. All study authors and examiners are blinded to the group allocation until completion of data analysis.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
MALE
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Elite level handball players healthy and actively competing at the time of the study * Patients must be at least 18 years at the time of signing the informed consent * Pregnancy must be ruled out in the case of female participants (e.g., pregnancy test) * Patient must be available for all specified assessments throughout the study duration * All patients are required to give written informed consent before enrollment
Exclusion criteria
* age <18, * history of type I or II shoulder instability according to the Stanmore classification12, * existing pain syndrome (defined by pain at rest or during motion that is not caused by dislocation and impedes training), * recent shoulder surgery (<1 year). * Contraindication to SPM treatment (e.g., cardiac pacemaker) * Neurological disorders or nerve injuries causing the instability * Uncontrolled alcohol or substance abuse
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Throwing velocity (km*h-1) | Baseline to 6-week post-intervention follow-up. | the difference in throwing velocity (km\*h-1) from baseline to 6-week post-intervention follow-up. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Isometric hand-held dynamometer (HHD) ER and internal rotation (IR) maximal shoulder strength | Baseline to 6-week post-intervention follow-up | Secondary outcome was the difference in isometric hand-held dynamometer (HHD) ER and internal rotation (IR) maximal shoulder strength at final follow-up. |
Countries
Austria
Outcome results
None listed