A kinetic chain approach for shoulder rehabilitation

J McMullen, T L Uhl, J McMullen, T L Uhl

Abstract

Objective: To introduce an approach to shoulder rehabilitation that integrates the kinetic chain throughout the rehabilitation program while providing the theoretical rationale for this program.

Background: The focus of a typical rehabilitation program is to identify and treat the involved structures. However, in activities of sport and daily life, the body does not operate in isolated segments but rather works as a dynamic unit. Recently, rehabilitation programs have emphasized closed kinetic chain exercises, core-stabilization exercises, and functional programs. These components are implemented as distinct entities and are used toward the end of the rehabilitation program.

Description: Kinetic chain shoulder rehabilitation incorporates the kinetic link biomechanical model and proximal-to-distal motor-activation patterns with proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation and closed kinetic chain exercise techniques. This approach focuses on movement patterns rather than isolated muscle exercises. Patterns sequentially use the leg, trunk, and scapular musculature to activate weakened shoulder musculature, gain active range of motion, and increase strength. The paradigm of kinetic chain shoulder rehabilitation suggests that functional movement patterns and closed kinetic chain exercises should be incorporated throughout the rehabilitation process.

Clinical advantages: The exercises in this approach are consistent with biomechanical models, apply biomechanical and motor control theory, and work toward sport specificity. The exercises are designed to stimulate weakened tissue by motion and force production in the adjacent kinetic link segments.

References

    1. Clin Sports Med. 1983 Jul;2(2):247-70
    1. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1993 Jul;18(1):365-78
    1. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1999 Jan-Feb;8(1):31-6
    1. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1999 Oct;29(10):574-83; discussion 584-6
    1. Arch Phys Med. 1952 Sep;33(9):521-33
    1. J Athl Train. 1994 Dec;29(4):297-300
    1. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992 Dec;(285):191-9
    1. Am J Sports Med. 1992 Mar-Apr;20(2):128-34
    1. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1988 Jul;51(7):956-65
    1. Am J Sports Med. 1988 Nov-Dec;16(6):577-85
    1. Clin Sports Med. 1988 Apr;7(2):403-16
    1. Am J Sports Med. 1987 Mar-Apr;15(2):144-8
    1. Acta Orthop Scand. 1971;42(6):491-505
    1. Am J Phys Med. 1967 Feb;46(1):838-99
    1. J Neurophysiol. 1982 Feb;47(2):287-302
    1. J Biomech. 1994 May;27(5):551-69
    1. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994 Sep;76(5):834-6
    1. J Neurophysiol. 1979 Jan;42(1 Pt 1):183-94
    1. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1993 Jul;18(1):386-91
    1. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1993 Aug;18(2):422-6
    1. J Biomech. 1993;26 Suppl 1:125-35
    1. J Biomech. 1995 Oct;28(10):1179-91
    1. Sports Med. 1996 Jun;21(6):421-37
    1. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1996 Aug;24(2):57-65
    1. Am J Sports Med. 1997 Jan-Feb;25(1):130-7
    1. Exp Brain Res. 1997 Apr;114(2):362-70
    1. Am J Sports Med. 1998 Mar-Apr;26(2):325-37
    1. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1998 Apr;30(4 Suppl):S40-50
    1. Phys Ther. 1994 Jan;74(1):17-28; discussion 28-31
    1. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1993 Jul;18(1):342-50
    1. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1998 Sep-Oct;7(5):491-4

Source: PubMed

3
Abonneren