A comparison of forearm supination and elbow flexion strength in patients with long head of the biceps tenotomy or tenodesis

John R. Shank, Steven B. Singleton, Sepp Braun, Michael J. Kissenberth, Arun Ramappa, Henry Ellis, Michael J. Decker, Richard J. Hawkins, Michael R. Torry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

59 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the forearm supination and elbow flexion strength of the upper extremity in patients who have had an arthroscopic long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) release with patients who have had an LHBT tenodesis. Methods: Cybex isokinetic strength testing (Cybex Division of Lumex, Ronkonkoma, NY) was performed on 17 patients who underwent arthroscopic LHBT tenotomy, 19 patients who underwent arthroscopic LHBT tenodesis, and 31 age-, gender-, and body mass indexmatched control subjects. Subjects were considered fully recovered from shoulder surgery, were released for unrestricted activities, and were at least 6 months after surgery before testing. Subjects were tested for forearm supination and elbow flexion strength of both arms by use of a Cybex II NORM isokinetic dynamometer at 60°/s and 120°/s. Testing was performed on injured and uninjured arms as well as dominant and nondominant arms in control subjects. Both forearm supination and elbow flexion strength values were recorded. Results: Comparison between the involved and uninvolved upper extremities within each group by use of a paired t test showed a 7% increase in elbow flexion strength when the dominant and nondominant arms were compared at 60°/s. Neither the tenotomy nor tenodesis groups exhibited elbow flexion strength differences at 120°/s (all P < .147). Comparison between groups by use of 2 × 3 analysis of variance (speed × group) showed no statistical difference in either forearm supination or elbow flexion strength when we compared the tenotomy, tenodesis, and control groups. Conclusions In asymptomatic patients who have had biceps tenotomy or tenodesis, no statistically significant forearm supination or elbow flexion strength differences existed in the involved extremity between the 2 study groups. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)9-16
Number of pages8
JournalArthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery
Volume27
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2011

Fingerprint

Tenodesis
Tenotomy
Supination
Elbow
Forearm
Arm
Tendons
Upper Extremity
Case-Control Studies
Analysis of Variance
Extremities
Control Groups

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

A comparison of forearm supination and elbow flexion strength in patients with long head of the biceps tenotomy or tenodesis. / Shank, John R.; Singleton, Steven B.; Braun, Sepp; Kissenberth, Michael J.; Ramappa, Arun; Ellis, Henry; Decker, Michael J.; Hawkins, Richard J.; Torry, Michael R.

In: Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery, Vol. 27, No. 1, 01.01.2011, p. 9-16.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Shank, John R. ; Singleton, Steven B. ; Braun, Sepp ; Kissenberth, Michael J. ; Ramappa, Arun ; Ellis, Henry ; Decker, Michael J. ; Hawkins, Richard J. ; Torry, Michael R. / A comparison of forearm supination and elbow flexion strength in patients with long head of the biceps tenotomy or tenodesis. In: Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery. 2011 ; Vol. 27, No. 1. pp. 9-16.
@article{8da9ddfffcff4ae59db316392696c9f8,
title = "A comparison of forearm supination and elbow flexion strength in patients with long head of the biceps tenotomy or tenodesis",
abstract = "Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the forearm supination and elbow flexion strength of the upper extremity in patients who have had an arthroscopic long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) release with patients who have had an LHBT tenodesis. Methods: Cybex isokinetic strength testing (Cybex Division of Lumex, Ronkonkoma, NY) was performed on 17 patients who underwent arthroscopic LHBT tenotomy, 19 patients who underwent arthroscopic LHBT tenodesis, and 31 age-, gender-, and body mass indexmatched control subjects. Subjects were considered fully recovered from shoulder surgery, were released for unrestricted activities, and were at least 6 months after surgery before testing. Subjects were tested for forearm supination and elbow flexion strength of both arms by use of a Cybex II NORM isokinetic dynamometer at 60°/s and 120°/s. Testing was performed on injured and uninjured arms as well as dominant and nondominant arms in control subjects. Both forearm supination and elbow flexion strength values were recorded. Results: Comparison between the involved and uninvolved upper extremities within each group by use of a paired t test showed a 7{\%} increase in elbow flexion strength when the dominant and nondominant arms were compared at 60°/s. Neither the tenotomy nor tenodesis groups exhibited elbow flexion strength differences at 120°/s (all P < .147). Comparison between groups by use of 2 × 3 analysis of variance (speed × group) showed no statistical difference in either forearm supination or elbow flexion strength when we compared the tenotomy, tenodesis, and control groups. Conclusions In asymptomatic patients who have had biceps tenotomy or tenodesis, no statistically significant forearm supination or elbow flexion strength differences existed in the involved extremity between the 2 study groups. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.",
author = "Shank, {John R.} and Singleton, {Steven B.} and Sepp Braun and Kissenberth, {Michael J.} and Arun Ramappa and Henry Ellis and Decker, {Michael J.} and Hawkins, {Richard J.} and Torry, {Michael R.}",
year = "2011",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.arthro.2010.06.022",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "9--16",
journal = "Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery",
issn = "0749-8063",
publisher = "W.B. Saunders Ltd",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of forearm supination and elbow flexion strength in patients with long head of the biceps tenotomy or tenodesis

AU - Shank, John R.

AU - Singleton, Steven B.

AU - Braun, Sepp

AU - Kissenberth, Michael J.

AU - Ramappa, Arun

AU - Ellis, Henry

AU - Decker, Michael J.

AU - Hawkins, Richard J.

AU - Torry, Michael R.

PY - 2011/1/1

Y1 - 2011/1/1

N2 - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the forearm supination and elbow flexion strength of the upper extremity in patients who have had an arthroscopic long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) release with patients who have had an LHBT tenodesis. Methods: Cybex isokinetic strength testing (Cybex Division of Lumex, Ronkonkoma, NY) was performed on 17 patients who underwent arthroscopic LHBT tenotomy, 19 patients who underwent arthroscopic LHBT tenodesis, and 31 age-, gender-, and body mass indexmatched control subjects. Subjects were considered fully recovered from shoulder surgery, were released for unrestricted activities, and were at least 6 months after surgery before testing. Subjects were tested for forearm supination and elbow flexion strength of both arms by use of a Cybex II NORM isokinetic dynamometer at 60°/s and 120°/s. Testing was performed on injured and uninjured arms as well as dominant and nondominant arms in control subjects. Both forearm supination and elbow flexion strength values were recorded. Results: Comparison between the involved and uninvolved upper extremities within each group by use of a paired t test showed a 7% increase in elbow flexion strength when the dominant and nondominant arms were compared at 60°/s. Neither the tenotomy nor tenodesis groups exhibited elbow flexion strength differences at 120°/s (all P < .147). Comparison between groups by use of 2 × 3 analysis of variance (speed × group) showed no statistical difference in either forearm supination or elbow flexion strength when we compared the tenotomy, tenodesis, and control groups. Conclusions In asymptomatic patients who have had biceps tenotomy or tenodesis, no statistically significant forearm supination or elbow flexion strength differences existed in the involved extremity between the 2 study groups. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.

AB - Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the forearm supination and elbow flexion strength of the upper extremity in patients who have had an arthroscopic long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) release with patients who have had an LHBT tenodesis. Methods: Cybex isokinetic strength testing (Cybex Division of Lumex, Ronkonkoma, NY) was performed on 17 patients who underwent arthroscopic LHBT tenotomy, 19 patients who underwent arthroscopic LHBT tenodesis, and 31 age-, gender-, and body mass indexmatched control subjects. Subjects were considered fully recovered from shoulder surgery, were released for unrestricted activities, and were at least 6 months after surgery before testing. Subjects were tested for forearm supination and elbow flexion strength of both arms by use of a Cybex II NORM isokinetic dynamometer at 60°/s and 120°/s. Testing was performed on injured and uninjured arms as well as dominant and nondominant arms in control subjects. Both forearm supination and elbow flexion strength values were recorded. Results: Comparison between the involved and uninvolved upper extremities within each group by use of a paired t test showed a 7% increase in elbow flexion strength when the dominant and nondominant arms were compared at 60°/s. Neither the tenotomy nor tenodesis groups exhibited elbow flexion strength differences at 120°/s (all P < .147). Comparison between groups by use of 2 × 3 analysis of variance (speed × group) showed no statistical difference in either forearm supination or elbow flexion strength when we compared the tenotomy, tenodesis, and control groups. Conclusions In asymptomatic patients who have had biceps tenotomy or tenodesis, no statistically significant forearm supination or elbow flexion strength differences existed in the involved extremity between the 2 study groups. Level of Evidence: Level III, case-control study.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78650767789&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78650767789&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.arthro.2010.06.022

DO - 10.1016/j.arthro.2010.06.022

M3 - Article

C2 - 21035992

AN - SCOPUS:78650767789

VL - 27

SP - 9

EP - 16

JO - Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery

JF - Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery

SN - 0749-8063

IS - 1

ER -