Omuz Propriyosepsiyonu: El Tercihi, Cinsiyet ve Hareket Yönü Üzerine Kesitsel Karşılaştırmalı Bir Çalışma

Year 2025, Volume: 10 Issue: 3, 394 - 399, 30.09.2025

Barış Seven , Gamze Çobanoğlu Demirkan , Ali Zorlular , Ahmet Gökkurt , Nihan Karataş , Nevin A. Güzel , Deran Oskay

https://doi.org/10.61399/ikcusbfd.1610268

Abstract

Amaç: Omuz eklemi, üst ekstremite fonksiyonu ve hareketliliğinde kritik bir rol oynar. Omuz propriyosepsiyonunun kapsamlı bir şekilde incelenmesi, omuz instabilitesi ve/veya yaralanma riski taşıyan omuzların erken tespiti için esastır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, cinsiyet, el tercihi ve hareket yönü faktörlerine göre omuz eklemindeki propriyosepsiyon değişikliklerini incelemektir.
Gereç ve Yöntem: 60 sağlıklı genç yetişkin (30 erkek, 30 kadın) ile kesitsel bir çalışma gerçekleştirildi. Katılımcıların omuz iç rotasyon (IR) ve dış rotasyon (ER) aktif eklem pozisyon hisleri (AEPH) izokinetik dinamometre kullanılarak değerlendirildi. Farkları değerlendirmek için Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Testi ve Mann-Whitney U Testi kullanıldı.
Bulgular: İstatistiksel analizler, her iki ekstremite için de cinsiyetler arasında omuz IR ve ER hareketlerinin AEPH’lerinde anlamlı bir fark olmadığını ortaya koydu (dominant IR: p=0,075, r=0,325, ER: p=0,459, r=0,135, ve dominant olmayan IR: p=0,122, r=0,283, ER: p=0,476, r=0,130). Ayrıca, dominant ve dominant olmayan ekstremiteler arasında (IR: p=0,283, r=0,139, ve ER: p=0,306, r=0,132) ve IR ile ER hareketleri arasında (dominant: p=0,102, r=0,211 ve dominant olmayan: p=0,724, r=0,045) AEPH'nde herhangi bir fark bulunmadı.
Sonuç: Çalışma, omuz eklemindeki AEPH’nin cinsiyet, el tercihi veya hareket yönüne göre değişmediği sonucuna varmıştır. Ayrıca, çalışmamızda bulduğumuz AJPS değerleri klinik değerlendirmeler için bir referans olarak kullanılabilir ve propriyoseptif bozuklukların belirlenmesine yardımcı olabilir. Ayrıca, sonuçlarımız, omuz propriyosepsiyonu üzerine yapılan bilimsel çalışmalarda cinsiyet veya el tercihi faktörlerine göre katılımcı gruplarının homojenliğini sağlamaya yardımcı olabilir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Eklemler, propriyosepsiyon, referans, üst ekstremite.

Keywords

Eklemler , propriyosepsiyon , referans , üst ekstremite

Shoulder Proprioception: A Cross-Sectional Comparative Study on Handedness, Sex, and Direction of Movement

Abstract

Objective: The shoulder joint plays a crucial role in upper limb function and mobility. A thorough examination of shoulder proprioception is essential for the early identification of at-risk shoulders, with the aim of eliminating the risk of shoulder instability and/or injury. This study aims to examine the changes in proprioception in the shoulder joint based on factors of sex, handedness, and movement direction.
Material and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 60 healthy young adults (30 men, 30 women). Participants' active joint position senses (AJPS) were evaluated for shoulder internal rotation (IR) and external rotation (ER) using an isokinetic dynamometer. The Wilcoxon Signed-Rank Test and Mann-Whitney U Test were used to assess differences.
Results: Statistical analyses revealed no significant differences in the AJPS of shoulder IR and ER movements between the sexes for both extremities (dominant IR: p=0.075, r=0.325, ER: p=0.459, r=0.135, and non-dominant IR: p=0.122, r=0.283, ER: p=0.476, r=0.130). Additionally, no differences were found in AJPS between the dominant and non-dominant extremities (IR: p=0.283, r=0.139, ve ER: p=0.306, r=0.132), as well as between IR and ER movements (dominant: p=0.102, r=0.211 and non-dominant: p=0.724, r=0.0.045).
Conclusion: The study concludes that AJPS in the shoulder joint does not vary based on sex, handedness, or direction of movement. In addition, the AJPS values we found in our study may be used as a reference for clinical evaluations and may help to identify proprioceptive disorders. Additionally, our results can facilitate ensuring the homogeneity of participant groups concerning sex or handedness factors in scientific studies on shoulder proprioception.
Keywords: Joints, proprioception, reference, upper extremity.

Keywords

Joints , proprioception , reference , upper extremity

References

• 1. Gonzalez Iturri J. Proprioception and coordination in rehabilitation of sports injuries. Rehabilitation of Sports Injuries: Scientific Basis Massachusetts: IOC Medical Commission Publication. 2003:274-84.
• 2. Kaya D Kaya D. What is proprioception? In: Kaya D, editor. Proprioception: the forgotten sixth sense. Foster City (CA): OMICS Group eBooks; 2014. p. 4–6.
• 3. Dover G, Powers ME. Reliability of joint position sense and force-reproduction measures during internal and external rotation of the shoulder. Journal of athletic training. 2003;38(4):304.
• 4. Lin Y-L, Karduna A. Errors in shoulder joint position sense mainly come from the glenohumeral joint. Journal of applied biomechanics. 2017;33(1):32-8.
• 5. Abrams R, Akbarnia H. Shoulder dislocations overview. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2023 [cited 2024 Dec 26]. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK459125/
• 6. Abass MY, Shendy W, Samir H, Sweif RE, Ahmed MA, Awad A. Assessment of shoulder proprioception in patients with chronic mechanical cervical pain: A comparative study. Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation. 2023;36(6):1285-93.
• 7. Ribeiro F, Oliveira J. Factors influencing proprioception: what do they reveal? In: Klika V, editor. Biomechanics in applications. Rijeka (HR): InTech; 2011. p. 323–346.
• 8. Akpunarli B, Yilgor C, Alanay A. Proprioception after spine injury and surgery. Proprioception in orthopaedics, sports medicine and rehabilitation. 2018:65-71.
• 9. Huxel KC. Gender differences in muscle recruitment and stiffness regulation strategies of the shoulder [dissertation]. [Philadelphia (PA)]: Temple University; 2005. p. 67.
• 10. Blasier R, Carpenter J, Huston L. Shoulder proprioception. Effect of joint laxity, joint position, and direction of motion. Orthopaedic review. 1994;23(1):45-50.
• 11. Bouffard J, Martinez R, Plamondon A, Côté JN, Begon M. Sex differences in glenohumeral muscle activation and coactivation during a box lifting task. Ergonomics. 2019;62(10):1327-38.
• 12. Hall LA, McCloskey D. Detections of movements imposed on finger, elbow and shoulder joints. The journal of physiology. 1983;335(1):519-33.
• 13. Burgess KE, Graham‐Smith P, Pearson SJ. Effect of acute tensile loading on gender‐specific tendon structural and mechanical properties. Journal of orthopaedic research. 2009;27(4):510-6.
• 14. Magnuson JA, Wolf BR, Cronin KJ, Jacobs CA, Ortiz SF, Bishop JY, et al. Sex-related differences in patients undergoing surgery for shoulder instability: a Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability cohort study. Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery. 2019;28(6):1013-21.
• 15. Won EJ, Johnson PW, Punnett L, Dennerlein JT. Upper extremity biomechanics in computer tasks differ by gender. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology. 2009;19(3):428-36.
• 16. Redding GM, Wallace B. Effects on prism adaptation of duration and timing of visual feedback during pointing. Journal of Motor Behavior. 1990;22(2):209-24.
• 17. Côté JN. A critical review on physical factors and functional characteristics that may explain a sex/gender difference in work-related neck/shoulder disorders. Ergonomics. 2012;55(2):173-82.
• 18. Rivest K, Côté JN, Dumas J-P, Sterling M, De Serres SJ. Relationships between pain thresholds, catastrophizing and gender in acute whiplash injury. Manual therapy. 2010;15(2):154-9.
• 19. Messing K, Stock SR, Tissot F. Should studies of risk factors for musculoskeletal disorders be stratified by gender? Lessons from the 1998 Quebec Health and Social Survey (vol 35, pg 96, 2009). Journal of work environment & health. 2009;35(5):400-.
• 20. Proske U. Kinesthesia: the role of muscle receptors. Muscle & Nerve: Official Journal of the American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine. 2006;34(5):545-58.
• 21. Carlson, B. (Ed.). Chapter 3: Normal Muscle Growth. In Muscle Biology: The Life History of a Muscle; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2021; pp. 57–75.
• 22. Azevedo J, Rodrigues S, Seixas A. The influence of sports practice, dominance and gender on the knee joint position sense. The Knee. 2021;28:117-23.
• 23. Walker EH, Perreault EJ. Arm dominance affects feedforward strategy more than feedback sensitivity during a postural task. Experimental brain research. 2015;233:2001-11.
• 24. Brookham RL, Dickerson CR. Empirical quantification of internal and external rotation muscular co-activation ratios in healthy shoulders. Medical & biological engineering & computing. 2014;52:257-64.
• 25. Shetty S, Neelapala YR, Vishal K. Normative values and the influence of sex, hand dominance, and direction of movement on active wrist joint position sense in young healthy adults. Musculoskeletal Science and Practice. 2024;73:103140.
• 26. Borsa PA, Lephart SM, Irrgang JJ, Safran MR, Fu FH. The effects of joint position and direction of joint motion on proprioceptive sensibility in anterior cruciate ligament-deficient athletes. The American journal of sports medicine. 1997;25(3):336-40.
• 27. Ben-Shabat E, Matyas TA, Pell GS, Brodtmann A, Carey LM. The right supramarginal gyrus is important for proprioception in healthy and stroke-affected participants: a functional MRI study. Frontiers in neurology. 2015;6:248.
• 28. Arslan S, Yapalı G. The inter-rater and intra-rater reliability of glenohumeral joint position and movement sense tests applied using an isokinetic dynamometer. Turkish journal of physiotherapy and rehabilitation. 2022;33(3):210-8.
• 29. Çobanoğlu G, Güzel NA, Suner-Keklik s, Seven B, Kafa N. Reliability of cybex norm isokinetic system in measuring shoulder isokinetic strength and proprioception. Journal of Exercise Therapy & Rehabilitation. 2018;5. 30. Seven B, Cobanoglu G, Oskay D, Atalay-Guzel N. Test–retest reliability of isokinetic wrist strength and proprioception measurements. Journal of sport rehabilitation. 2019;28(7):3.
• 31. CoolicanCoolican, H. Research Methods and Statistics in Psychology. 5th ed. Chapter 7: "Statistical Analysis and Interpretation; Psychology Press: London, UK, 2017; pp. 220–225.
• 32. Wolf JM, Cannada L, Van Heest AE, O’Connor MI, Ladd AL. Male and female differences in musculoskeletal disease. JAAOS-Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 2015;23(6):339-47.
• 33. Myer GD, Ford KR, Paterno MV, Nick TG, Hewett TE. The effects of generalized joint laxity on risk of anterior cruciate ligament injury in young female athletes. The American journal of sports medicine. 2008;36(6):1073-80.
• 34. Hagert E, Rein S. Wrist proprioception—an update on scientific insights and clinical implications in rehabilitation of the wrist. Journal of Hand Therapy. 2024;37(2):257-68.
• 35. Busch A, Bangerter C, Mayer F, Baur H. Reliability of the active knee joint position sense test and influence of limb dominance and sex. Scientific Reports. 2023;13(1):152.
• 36. Suprak DN, Osternig LR, Van Donkelaar P, Karduna AR. Shoulder joint position sense improves with elevation angle in a novel, unconstrained task. Journal of orthopaedic research. 2006;24(3):559-68.
• 37. Proske U, Wise A, Gregory J. Movement detection thresholds at the human elbow joint. Progress in Brain Research. 1999;123:143-7.
• 38. Lephart SM, Warner JJ, Borsa PA, Fu FH. Proprioception of the shoulder joint in healthy, unstable, and surgically repaired shoulders. Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery. 1994;3(6):371-80.
• 39. King J, Harding E, Karduna A. The shoulder and elbow joints and right and left sides demonstrate similar joint position sense. Journal of motor behavior. 2013;45(6):479-86.
• 40. Allegrucci M, Whitney SL, Lephart SM, Irrgang JJ, Fu FH. Shoulder kinesthesia in healthy unilateral athletes participating in upper extremity sports. Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy. 1995;21(4):220-6.
• 41. Waller SM, Whitall J. Bilateral arm training: why and who benefits? NeuroRehabilitation. 2008;23(1):29-41.
• 42. Vafadar AK, Côté JN, Archambault PS. The effect of muscle fatigue on position sense in an upper limb multi-joint task. Motor control. 2012;16(2):265-83.