The 1st Conference on Palestinian Athletics

Since most studies designed to prove the efficacy of functional anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) bracing among athletes have been equivocal, we felt it would be helpful to know how far the effect of bracing on stability and muscle power as main goals of this study.Methods 30 athletes clients have had an extra articular surgery (TFL) we redivided into two groups, 15 for each group, braced group and non braced(control) group undergone the same rehabilitation program (progressive accelerated rehabilitation program) for 8 weeks, stability was measured using BBS ( berg balance scale) and muscle power using MMT ( manual muscle testing) at the 1st day, 4th and 8th week postoperative, data was analyzed by SPSS (T-independent test) program. Results: BBS at the1st day postoperative the mean score of BBS for the braced group was14.9 and the 6.9 for the control group as T(degree of freedom)=7.7, at the 4th week the mean score for braced group was 26.9 and 18.7 for the control group as T(degree of freedom)=9.3 ,at the 8th week the mean score was 42 for braced group and 33.3 for control group as T(degree of freedom)=3.2 , and the mean for total score of BBS of the braced group was 83.8 and 59 for control group as T(degree of freedom)=6.4 , which indicate a better result of stability progression among braced group.According to the independent T-test it was a significant difference in testability progression during each period as well as the whole period of the rehabilitation program, as P<0.05 muscle power progression, the mean score at 1st postoperative for the braced group was 2.47 and 2.27for the control group as T(degree of freedom)=1.1, at the 4th week the mean score for the braced group was 3.67 and 3.6 for the control group as T(degree of freedom)=0.3, at 8th week the mean score 4.73 for braced group and 4.7 for control as T(degree of freedom)=0.7 and the mean for total score of MMT of braced group was 10.88 and 10.73 for control

Background: The shoulder joint is the main joint responsible for upper limb movements. Pathology of the shoulder joint creates an imbalance in its bilateral and unilateral movement, in addition to balance and coordination of other joints and movement of the upper
limb. Conflicting facts exist in the literature about whether bilateral comparison of shoulder strength is possible and how the dominant and the non dominant shoulder muscle strength relate to each other.

Objective: To investigate whether flexion/extension and horizontal abduction and horizontal adduction on the shoulder dominant side are significantly different from the non dominant side, and whether a bilateral comparison between muscle strength can be made.

Methods: Concentric flexion/extension and horizontal abduction/ horizontal adduction shoulder movements were measured in 23 health male participants using the ISOCOM® dynamometer. Performing five repetitions of each synergetic movement, peak torque values were used for data analysis using the ANOVA variance test along with correlations and linear regression.

Results: There was no statistically significant difference between dominant and non dominant flexion, horizontal abduction and horizontal adduction (p< 0.05). Poor to excellent correlations were found between movements. A linear regression made between the dominant and the non dominant shoulder movements resulted in equations which could predict a shoulder’s movement strength from its contra lateral one.

Conclusions: The study showed that bilateral comparison is possible and can be of help in shoulder pathology rehabilitation as it helps quantifying strength and weakness of the shoulder movements, and is able to predict recovery level and rehabilitation outcomes of the injured shoulder.