Volume 16, Issue 1 pp. 47-53

Original Article

Open Access

Shoulder structures and strength in competitive preadolescent swimmers: A longitudinal ultrasonographic study

Aykut Özçadırcı PT, MSc,

Corresponding Author

Aykut Özçadırcı PT, MSc

[email protected]

orcid.org/0000-0002-0882-1298

Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

Correspondence

Aykut Özçadırcı, PT, M.Sc., Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University 06100, Sıhhiye, Ankara, Turkey.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

Yahya Doğan MD,

Yahya Doğan MD

orcid.org/0000-0002-9481-1650

Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author

Ferhat Öztürk PT, MSc,

Ferhat Öztürk PT, MSc

orcid.org/0000-0003-4070-8831

Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author

Şükrü Alpan Cinemre PhD,

Şükrü Alpan Cinemre PhD

orcid.org/0000-0003-4955-2394

Faculty of Sport Sciences, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author

Gürsoy Coşkun PhD,

Gürsoy Coşkun PhD

orcid.org/0000-0002-4169-266X

Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author

Levent Özçakar MD,

Levent Özçakar MD

orcid.org/0000-0002-2713-4071

Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Hacettepe University Medical School, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author

Aykut Özçadırcı PT, MSc,

Corresponding Author

Aykut Özçadırcı PT, MSc

[email protected]

orcid.org/0000-0002-0882-1298

Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

Correspondence

Aykut Özçadırcı, PT, M.Sc., Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University 06100, Sıhhiye, Ankara, Turkey.

Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author

Yahya Doğan MD,

Yahya Doğan MD

orcid.org/0000-0002-9481-1650

Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author

Ferhat Öztürk PT, MSc,

Ferhat Öztürk PT, MSc

orcid.org/0000-0003-4070-8831

Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author

Şükrü Alpan Cinemre PhD,

Şükrü Alpan Cinemre PhD

orcid.org/0000-0003-4955-2394

Faculty of Sport Sciences, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author

Gürsoy Coşkun PhD,

Gürsoy Coşkun PhD

orcid.org/0000-0002-4169-266X

Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author

Levent Özçakar MD,

Levent Özçakar MD

orcid.org/0000-0002-2713-4071

Department of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Hacettepe University Medical School, Ankara, Turkey

Search for more papers by this author

First published: 09 June 2023

https://doi.org/10.1002/pmrj.13009

Share a link

Email
Wechat
Bluesky

Abstract

Background

Repetitive shoulder movements during competitive training may cause changes in the strength of periarticular shoulder structures in preadolescent swimmers.

Objective

To prospectively determine the effects of training on shoulder periarticular structures and muscle strength in preadolescent swimmers.

Design

Prospective cohort study.

Setting

Community-based natatorium.

Participants

Twenty-four preadolescent swimmers aged 10–12 years.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures

Measurements were repeated in three periods as preseason, midseason, and postseason. Ultrasonographic measurements (supraspinatus tendon thickness, humeral head cartilage thickness, deltoid muscle thickness, and acromiohumeral distance) were performed using a portable device and a linear probe. Shoulder (flexion, extension, abduction, internal and external rotation) and back (serratus anterior, lower, and middle trapezius) isometric muscle strength were measured with a handheld dynamometer.

Results

Supraspinatus tendon thickness and acromiohumeral distance were similar in all periods (all p > .05); however, deltoid muscle and humeral head cartilage thicknesses increased throughout the season (p = .002, p = .008, respectively). Likewise, whereas shoulder muscle strength increased (all p < .05), back muscle strength was similar in all periods (all p > .05).

Conclusions

In preadolescent swimmers, acromiohumeral distance and supraspinatus tendon thickness seem to not change; but humeral head cartilage and deltoid muscle thicknesses as well as shoulder muscle strength increase throughout the season.

INTRODUCTION

Competitive swimmers often train a distance of ~8000–14,000 meters per day, 6–7 days a week, for 10–12 months a year.^{1, 2} During these training sessions, ~2500–9600 shoulder rotations are completed per day^{2, 3} making these athletes prone to injuries of the shoulder complex.⁴ Likewise, shoulder pain is commonplace in swimmers,^5-8 with decreased acromiohumeral distance (AHD) and increased supraspinatus tendon thickness (STT) reported as predisposing factors.^9-14

Biomechanical studies showed that propulsive forces in swimming are mainly shoulder adduction and internal rotation,^{15, 16} and swimmers are at risk of shoulder injury, especially during front crawl-style arm rotation.¹⁷ Shoulder stabilizers (mainly the rotator cuff muscles ie, supraspinatus, infraspinatus, subscapularis, teres minor) significantly contribute to the maintenance of AHD by keeping the humeral head in the glenoid cavity during dynamic arm elevation.^{18, 19} As such, it is necessary to maintain the balance of strength among several (ie, rotator cuff, shoulder adductor, and internal rotator) muscles to reduce the risk of injury, although swimming training might cause imbalance between the shoulder rotators in (preadolescent) swimmers^20-22 and increase the risk for injury and shoulder pain.²³

The effects of swimming training on shoulder periarticular structures in an adolescent population have not been studied.^{11, 13, 14} The objective of this study was to prospectively explore the effects of training season on various shoulder structures and strength in competitive/elite preadolescent swimmers.

METHODS

Design and participants

This was a prospective cohort study in competitive preadolescent swimmers. Its protocol was approved by the local ethics committee (December 21, 2021; approval number: GO21/1341) and it was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the international principles governing research in humans and animals. The study was also registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT054268876).

Thirty nationally qualified swimmers aged between 10 and 12 years were recruited. Inclusion criteria were being elite-level member of the team and training at least five times a week (with at least 1–2 hours per session). Swimmers were excluded if they had less than 2 years of competitive swimming experience, limited participation in training (due to back, neck, or shoulder pain) for more than 2 weeks during the season, inability to complete full training, and history of shoulder surgery. All eligible swimmers and their legal guardians were informed of the study procedure and gave written consent.

Outcomes

Sitting/standing height, body weight, arm span/length, and shoulder width were measured and recorded. Shoulder width was defined as the distance between the lateral edges of the acromion processes.

Data were collected throughout the training season at the natatorium in which training was completed. Swimmers participated in three data collection sessions: baseline (preseason, T1), 12 weeks (midseason, T2), and 24 weeks (postseason, T3) after the initial assessment–January, April, and July, 2022, respectively. During the 24-week season, the swimmers were supervised by coaches during swimming training sessions twice daily three times per week, once daily three times per week. A standard/prescribed swimming training volume that swimmers are exposed to during the season is summarized in Figure 1. In addition to 24-week swimming training, the swimmers completed land-based training that included general strengthening/stretching exercises for the trunk and upper/lower limbs. Participants were instructed to avoid vigorous physical activity during the 24 hours before testing and did not participate in the training 1 day before the measurements to avoid any/possible fatigue. Measurements were taken after rest, at the beginning of each period.

Details are in the caption following the image — **FIGURE 1**
Open in figure viewer PowerPoint

Prescribed swimming volume (an average/week), that is, standard swimming training program for all swimmers during 24 weeks.

Strength measurements

Shoulder/back isometric muscle strength was measured with a hand-held dynamometer (HHD) (Model-01165, Lafayette Instrument Company, Lafayette, IN, USA), which is a valid and reliable tool for assessing isometric muscle strength in swimmers.²⁴ Before the measurements, participants were verbally informed about the technique. To ensure correct movement, participants were asked to perform submaximal contraction against the assessor's hand before the test and the measurements were explained. The “break test” technique, which requires isometric contraction, was applied.²⁵ Bilateral shoulder (flexion, extension, abduction, and internal/external rotation) and back (serratus anterior and middle/lower trapezius) muscle strengths were measured with three repetitions (average values were included in the analyses). A 30-second rest was given between measurements during which the tester otherwise verbally motivated the swimmers.

Strength measurements were performed according to previous protocols.²⁶ Flexion and extension isometric strength were measured at 140° abduction of the shoulder in the scapular plane, with the elbow elongated (simulating hand entry and early pull-through phase during swimming). Internal/external rotation (IR/ER) measurements were done at 90° abduction of the arm, with the elbow at 90° flexion (simulating mid-pull-through and recovery phases of the swim). For measuring abduction, participants were in the sitting position with the arms positioned at 90° of abduction, resistance was applied superior to the elbow.

For middle trapezius, the swimmers were placed in prone position at 90° glenohumeral abduction, with the elbow at 90° flexion whereby the dynamometer was placed on the posterolateral corner of the acromion. Resistance was applied laterally. The clinician stabilized the contralateral scapula while matching the force exerted by the participant (Appendix A: Figure A1). For the lower trapezius, the arm was positioned in 140° glenohumeral abduction whereby the dynamometer was placed on the posterolateral corner of the acromion. Resistance was applied in the lateral and superior directions with the dynamometer. The clinician stabilized the contralateral hip while matching the force of the participant (Appendix B: Figure A2). Serratus anterior was tested in supine position with the elbow and shoulder in 90° flexion. Resistance was applied over the ulna along the humeral axis (Appendix C: Figure A3).²⁷

Because the study included swimmers of different body weights, the mean maximum contraction force was standardized to body weight (N/kg × 100).²⁶ ER/IR ratio was calculated from the values standardized for body weight in each swimmer.

Ultrasonographic measurements

All images were obtained by a physiatrist with at least 4 years of experience in musculoskeletal ultrasound. A smartphone-based portable ultrasound device and a linear probe (Clarius Mobile Health, 205-2980 Virtual Way, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada) were used. To avoid compression, a generous amount of gel was applied and the probe was held using the suspension technique, that is, touching only the skin. Measurements were done before training in the swimming pool setting in accordance with the European Musculoskeletal Ultrasound Study Group/Ultrasound Study Group of the International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EURO-MUSCULUS/USPRM) protocols.^{28, 29} Participants were positioned so that the dorsal aspect of the hand was placed in the low back region, while the arm was in extension, adduction, and internal rotation. Anterior deltoid muscle thickness (DMT) was measured between its inner and outer fasciae. STT was measured between the subdeltoid bursa and the underlying cartilage. Humeral head cartilage thickness (HCT) was measured as the anechoic space over the bone and AHD was measured between the humerus and acromion in neutral position (Figure 2).

Statistical analysis

Data were evaluated with SPSS 23.0 (IBM SPSS Statistics version 23.0, IBM Corp. Armonk, New York, USA). Numerical values are given as mean and SD or median and quartiles, depending on data normality. Categorical variables are given using frequency (n) and percentage (%) values. Normal distribution was tested using both graphical (eg, Q-Q plot, histogram, etc.) and analytical (eg, Shapiro–Wilk's normality test) techniques. Repeated measure analysis of variance was used to analyze differences between periods. The Greenhouse–Geisser correction was performed if the sphericity assumption was violated. Pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni correction were conducted when there was a significant time effect by period interactions. The eta-squared (η²) test was used to quantify the percentage of the variance explained by each covariate (effect size) and interpreted as follows: 0 < η² < 0.04 trivial effect, 0.04 < η² ≤ 0.24 small, 0.25 ≤ η² < 0.64 moderate, and η² > 0.64 large effect. Statistical significance was set at p < .05.

G*Power 3.1 statistical program was used for sample size calculation that is, with a two-tailed type 1 error of .05 and a statistical power of 85% using the pre- and postseason AHD mean ± SD values (1.21 ± 0.3; 1.04 ± 0.1, respectively) obtained from the study of Hibbert et al.¹² Twenty-four swimmers were calculated to be included in the current study.

RESULTS

Thirty preadolescent swimmers volunteered to participate and six who did not complete the training season due to injury and/or inability to continue swimming regularly during the season were excluded. Therefore, 24 swimmers (aged 11.7 ± 0.9 years) participated in all three data collection sessions. Their anthropometric characteristics are summarized in Table 1.

TABLE 1. Characteristics of the swimmers.

	No.	%
Gender
Female	11	45.8
Male	13	54.2
Swimming style
Front crawl	7	29.2
Butterfly	5	20.8
Back crawl	5	20.8
Breaststroke	7	29.2

	Mean ± SD	Range
Age (year)	11.7 ± 0.9	10.2–12.9
Swimming experience (year)	4.8 ± 1.4	3–6
Body height (cm)	157.5 ± 8.5	140.0–176.0
Body weight (kg)	46.9 ± 8.3	30.7–63.1
Body mass index (kg/m²)	18.5 ± 2.8	14.0–22.6
Arm span (cm)	161.0 ± 10.9	138.2–182.2
Shoulder width (cm)	38.7 ± 2.6	33.2–44.3
Upper arm length (cm)	80.5 ± 5.4	69–91
Sitting height (cm)	82.6 ± 4.2	74.5–91.2

Changes in muscle strengths

Comparative muscle strength measurements are presented in Table 2. Although shoulder IR, ER, flexion, extension, and abduction significantly increased, serratus anterior and lower/middle trapezius strengths were similar throughout the season. In more detail, mean IR increased by 15.8% (p = .015) between T1 and T2, by 31.6% (p < .001) between T1 and T3, by 13.6% (p = .022) between T2 and T3. Mean ER increased by 15.0% (p = .003) between T1 and T2, by 21.5% (p < .001) between T1 and T3. Mean flexion increased by 16.0% (p = .006) between T1 and T2, by 31.7% (p = .001) between T1 and T3. Mean extension increased by 30.0% (p < .001) between T1 and T3, by 21.6% (p < .001) between T2 and T3. Mean abduction increased by 9.0% (p = .048) between T1 and T3.

TABLE 2. Shoulder and back muscle strength (N/kg × body weight) throughout the training season.

	Mean ± SD	Mean ± SD	Mean ± SD	F	p	η²
	Preseason (T1)	Midseason (T2)	Postseason (T3)	Time effect
Shoulder
Internal rotation	191.8 ± 41.4	222.2 ± 49.5^b	252.3 ± 54.7^c^,^d	19.149	<.001^a	0.50
External rotation	173.5 ± 34.5	199.4 ± 37.6^b	210.7 ± 28.9^c	14.910	<.001^a	0.44
ER/IR ratio	0.9 ± 0.1	0.9 ± 0.1	0.8 ± 0.1	1.635	.212	0.08
Flexion	129.0 ± 20.6	149.7 ± 27.2^b	169.9 ± 39.4^c	13.403	<.001^a	0.41
Extension	126.8 ± 27.8	135.6 ± 22.0	164.9 ± 17.9^c^,^d	27.954	<.001^a	0.60
Abduction	238.7 ± 27.8	256.7 ± 37.2	260.2 ± 40.4^c	3.440	.042^a	0.15
Back
Serratus anterior	375.4 ± 55.2	381.2 ± 73.4	390.3 ± 64.2	0.644	.531	0.03
Middle trapezius	215.0 ± 59.6	216.0 ± 37.0	219.7 ± 43.7	0.133	.875	0.01
Lower trapezius	171.0 ± 46.2	180.1 ± 36.0	188.4 ± 29.8	1.716	.193	0.08

Abbreviations: ER, external rotation; IR, internal rotation.
^a Significant time effect (p < .05).
^b Significant change between T1 and T2 (p < .05).
^c Significant change between T1 and T3 (p < .05).
^d Significant change between T2 and T3 (p < .05).

Changes in ultrasonographic measurements

Comparative measurements are presented in Table 3. DMT significantly changed between the periods (F = 7.077; p = .002; η² = 0.24 “small effect”), that is, increased by 9.2% (p = .014) between T1 and T2, increased by 13.9% (p = .010) between T1 and T3, similar between T2 and T3 (p = .720). HCT also changed significantly between the periods (F = 6.842, p = .008, η² = 0.25) that is, increased by 15.5% (p = .015) between T1 and T3, similar between T1 and T2 (p = .117), T2 and T3 (p = .130). STT and AHD measurements were similar in all periods (F = 1.85, p = .182; F = 1.463, p = .245, respectively).

TABLE 3. Ultrasonographic measurements (mm) throughout the training season.

	Mean ± SD	Mean ± SD	Mean ± SD	F	p	η²
	Preseason (T1)	Midseason (T2)	Postseason (T3)	Time effect
Deltoid muscle thickness	4.46 ± 0.79	4.87 ± 0.85^b	5.09 ± 0.97^c	7.077	.002^a	0.24
Supraspinatus tendon thickness	5.24 ± 0.69	5.11 ± 0.81	5.41 ± 0.88	1.850	.182	0.08
Cartilage thickness	1.50 ± 0.46	1.58 ± 0.42	1.74 ± 0.53^c	6.842	.008^a	0.25
Acromiohumeral distance	10.85 ± 1.80	10.47 ± 1.39	10.40 ± 1.37	1.463	.245	0.06

^a Significant time effect (p < .05).
^b Significant change between T1 and T2 (p < .05).
^c Significant change between T1 and T3 (p < .05).

DISCUSSION

This study provides information regarding the changes of shoulder structure/strength in preadolescent swimmers throughout the competitive season. Structurewise, HCT and DMT increased; AHD and STT did not change. Strengthwise, ER/IR ratio and back strength did not change, but other muscle strengths increased during the swimming season.

Decreased AHD can cause mechanical stress on soft tissues in the subacromial space and make swimmers more vulnerable to shoulder pain/injury.^{30, 31} Hibberd et al.¹¹ found that AHD was not different between swimmers and nonoverhead athletes in preseason measurements; however, another study showed that AHD significantly decreased in swimmers during the training season for 12 weeks.¹² Our study revealed that AHD did not significantly decrease throughout the competitive season, because of the land-based training program that includes strengthening of the muscles that prevent excessive cranial translation of the humeral head.^{32, 33} Another possible reason could be the preadolescent age of our population with naturally shorter exposure to swimming training. Nonetheless, slight narrowing of the AHD could have also stemmed from scapular motion disorders, that is, the lack of sufficient increase in back muscles strength (responsible for scapular stabilization). However, the influence of muscles responsible for scapular stabilization on scapular movement is controversial. A recent randomized controlled study reported that exercises aiming to improve scapular biomechanics and stabilization did not have sufficient effect on scapular movement.³⁴ Contrary to this study, Hotta et al. showed that intersegmental coordination exercises could modulate the scapular tilt.³⁵

Although there are previous reports on STT in swimmers,^{8, 13, 14, 36} longitudinal follow up throughout the season is limited.³⁷ Examining the acute effects of swimming, Porter et al.^{13, 14} showed increased STT, whereas Tate et al.³⁷ reported that it did not significantly change during the season. Our results were in keeping with the latter study. At this point, it would be noteworthy that although the response of the tendon to acute loading is increased thickness, the absence of significant changes during the season could indicate adaptation to chronic loading.^{38, 39} This would also be important to avoid mechanical impingement.

When compared with the reported reference values of healthy children aged 10–12 years,⁴⁰ HCT was lower in our study, though it showed significant/progressive increase throughout the season. Whether these results are favorable or due to overload/edema is not yet known.

Concerning strength assessment, Manske et al.⁴¹ reported increased shoulder flexion, extension, IR, ER, and abduction strengths after land and swimming training throughout the season. Similarly, our results yielded consistent increase in shoulder flexion, IR, ER, and abduction strengths during the competitive 24-week season. As low shoulder extension strength is known to be potentially related to shoulder pain,²³ despite having not evaluated any pain scores in our patients, we can speculate that the increased extension strength may be protective against the development of pain in swimmers.

The balanced ratio of shoulder ER and IR is more important than absolute IR and ER strength, especially in overhead athletes.^{21, 42} The literature provides evidence that IR becomes stronger than ER from the beginning to the end of the season, with an eventual strength imbalance during the pull (push) phase in swimmers.^{21, 42, 43} This imbalance changes the centralization of humeral head in the glenoid space, possibly causing impingement/injury. Contrary to the aforementioned studies, although both increased, ER and IR strength balance was maintained throughout the season in our study. Although the strength ratios did not change after 24-week follow-up, increased IR strength from midseason to the end of the season was greater than that of ER. As our study provides data concerning a period of 24 weeks, these preadolescent swimmers need to be followed to more advanced levels for detecting possible muscle imbalances and reducing the risk of injury. Particularly, participants who have completed their growth/maturation with longer swimming background can be enrolled and also assessed in correlation with the pertinent clinical signs/symptoms.

Swimming is a sport in which upper limb repetitive movements are inevitable; therefore, good scapular stabilization is required to perform the stroke. In this aspect, lower trapezius and serratus anterior muscles play an important role.⁴⁴ Our results failed to show any gain in back muscle strength during the swimming season, which might predispose competitive swimmers to relevant injuries. For example, the lower trapezius enables the scapula to rotate upward, helping to prevent compression during swimming (stroke).⁴⁵

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings showed that the AHD and STT did not change during the competition season and that the HCT and DMT increased. Additionally, progressive increase in shoulder, but not back, muscle strength was observed during the 24-week period. These results showed that the 24-week training period caused changes in the periarticular shoulder structures (that could be detected with ultrasound) and progressive increase in the shoulder muscle strength.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to thank all the swimmers, their parents and coach Efe Orhan of the sports club.

DISCLOSURES

None.

Supporting Information

REFERENCES

1Hibberd EE, Myers JB. Practice habits and attitudes and behaviors concerning shoulder pain in high school competitive club swimmers. Clin J Sport Med. 2013; 23(6): 450-455.
10.1097/JSM.0b013e31829aa8ff
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
2Pink MM, Tibone JE. The painful shoulder in the swimming athlete. Orthop Clin North Am. 2000; 31(2): 247-261.
10.1016/S0030-5898(05)70145-0
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
3McMaster WC, Troup J. A survey of interfering shoulder pain in United States competitive swimmers. Am J Sports Med. 1993; 21(1): 67-70.
10.1177/036354659302100112
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
4Wanivenhaus F, Fox AJ, Chaudhury S, Rodeo SA. Epidemiology of injuries and prevention strategies in competitive swimmers. Sports Health. 2012; 4(3): 246-251.
10.1177/1941738112442132
PubMed Google Scholar
5Bales J, Bales K. Swimming overuse injuries associated with triathlon training. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev. 2012; 20(4): 196-199.
10.1097/JSA.0b013e318261093b
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
6Brushøj C, Bak K, Johannsen H, Faunø P. Swimmers' painful shoulder arthroscopic findings and return rate to sports. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2007; 17(4): 373-377.
10.1111/j.1600-0838.2006.00571.x
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
7Walker H, Gabbe B, Wajswelner H, Blanch P, Bennell K. Shoulder pain in swimmers: a 12-month prospective cohort study of incidence and risk factors. Phys Ther Sport. 2012; 13(4): 243-249.
10.1016/j.ptsp.2012.01.001
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
8Suzuki Y, Maeda N, Sasadai J, Kaneda K, Shirakawa T, Urabe Y. Ultrasonographic evaluation of the shoulders and its associations with shoulder pain, age, and swim training in masters swimmers. Medicina. 2021; 57(1): 29.
10.3390/medicina57010029
Google Scholar
9de Witte PB, Nagels J, van Arkel ER, Visser CP, Nelissen RG, de Groot JH. Study protocol subacromial impingement syndrome: the identification of pathophysiologic mechanisms (SISTIM). BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011; 12(1): 1-12.
10.1186/1471-2474-12-282
PubMed Google Scholar
10Michener LA, Subasi Yesilyaprak SS, Seitz AL, Timmons MK, Walsworth MK. Supraspinatus tendon and subacromial space parameters measured on ultrasonographic imaging in subacromial impingement syndrome. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015; 23(2): 363-369.
10.1007/s00167-013-2542-8
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
11Hibberd EE, Laudner K, Berkoff DJ, Kucera KL, Yu B, Myers JB. Comparison of upper extremity physical characteristics between adolescent competitive swimmers and nonoverhead athletes. J Athl Train. 2016; 51(1): 65-69.
10.4085/1062-6050-51.2.04
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
12Hibberd EE, Laudner KG, Kucera KL, Berkoff DJ, Yu B, Myers JB. Effect of swim training on the physical characteristics of competitive adolescent swimmers. Am J Sports Med. 2016; 44(11): 2813-2819.
10.1177/0363546516669506
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
13Porter KN, Blanch PD, Walker HM, Shield AJ. The effect of previous shoulder pain on supraspinatus tendon thickness changes following swimming practice. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2020; 30(8): 1442-1448.
10.1111/sms.13678
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
14Porter KN, Talpey S, Pascoe D, Blanch PD, Walker HM, Shield AJ. The effect of swimming volume and intensity on changes in supraspinatus tendon thickness. Phys Ther Sport. 2021; 47: 173-177.
10.1016/j.ptsp.2020.12.002
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
15O'Donnell CJ, Bowen J, Fossati J. Identifying and managing shoulder pain in competitive swimmers: how to minimize training flaws and other risks. Phys Sportsmed. 2005; 33(9): 27-35.
10.3810/psm.2005.09.195
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
16Johnson JN, Gauvin J, Fredericson M. Swimming biomechanics and injury prevention: new stroke techniques and medical considerations. Phys Sportsmed. 2003; 31(1): 41-46.
10.3810/psm.2003.01.165
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
17Yanai T, Hay JG. Shoulder impingement in front-crawl swimming: II. Analysis of stroking technique. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2000; 32(1): 30-40.
10.1097/00005768-200001000-00006
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
18Boettcher CE, Cathers I, Ginn KA. The role of shoulder muscles is task specific. J Sci Med Sport. 2010; 13(6): 651-656.
10.1016/j.jsams.2010.03.008
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
19Wilk KE, Arrigo C. Current concepts in the rehabilitation of the athletic shoulder. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1993; 18(1): 365-378.
10.2519/jospt.1993.18.1.365
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
20Batalha N, Marmeleira J, Garrido N, Silva AJ. Does a water-training macrocycle really create imbalances in swimmers' shoulder rotator muscles? Eur J Sport Sci. 2015; 15(2): 167-172.
10.1080/17461391.2014.908957
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
21Batalha NM, Raimundo AM, Tomas-Carus P, Barbosa TM, Silva AJ. Shoulder rotator cuff balance, strength, and endurance in young swimmers during a competitive season. J Strength Cond Res. 2013; 27(9): 2562-2568.
10.1519/JSC.0b013e31827fd849
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
22Batalha NM, Raimundo AM, Tomas-Carus P, Marques MA, Silva AJ. Does an in-season detraining period affect the shoulder rotator cuff strength and balance of young swimmers? J Strength Cond Res. 2014; 28(7): 2054-2062.
10.1519/JSC.0000000000000351
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
23McLaine SJ, Bird M-L, Ginn KA, Hartley T, Fell JW. Shoulder extension strength: a potential risk factor for shoulder pain in young swimmers? J Sci Med Sport. 2019; 22(5): 516-520.
10.1016/j.jsams.2018.11.008
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
24Coinceicao A, Parraca J, Marinho D, et al. Assessment of isometric strength of the shoulder rotators in swimmers using a handheld dynamometer: a reliability study. Acta Bioeng Biomech. 2018; 20(4): 113-119.
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
25Van der Ploeg R, Oosterhuis H. The “make/break test” as a diagnostic tool in functional weakness. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1991; 54(3): 248-251.
10.1136/jnnp.54.3.248
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
26McLaine SJ, Ginn KA, Fell JW, Bird M-L. Isometric shoulder strength in young swimmers. J Sci Med Sport. 2018; 21(1): 35-39.
10.1016/j.jsams.2017.05.003
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
27Çelik D, Dirican A, Baltaci G. Intrarater reliability of assessing strength of the shoulder and scapular muscles. J Sport Rehabil. 2012; 21(1): 1-5.
10.1123/jsr.2012.TR3
PubMed Google Scholar
28Özçakar L, Kara M, Chang K-V, et al. EURO-MUSCULUS/USPRM basic scanning protocols for shoulder. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2015; 51(4): 491-496.
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
29Ricci V, Chang K-V, Güvener O, et al. EURO-MUSCULUS/USPRM dynamic ultrasound protocols for shoulder. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2022; 101(3): 29-36.
10.1097/PHM.0000000000001833
Web of Science® Google Scholar
30Gumina S, Di Giorgio G, Postacchini F, Postacchini R. Subacromial space in adult patients with thoracic hyperkyphosis and in healthy volunteers. Chir Organi Mov. 2008; 91(2): 93-96.
10.1007/s12306-007-0016-1
PubMed Google Scholar
31Kalra N, Seitz AL, Boardman ND III, Michener LA. Effect of posture on acromiohumeral distance with arm elevation in subjects with and without rotator cuff disease using ultrasonography. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010; 40(10): 633-640.
10.2519/jospt.2010.3155
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
32Ricci V, Mezian K, Chang K-V, Özçakar L. Clinical/sonographic assessment and Management of Calcific Tendinopathy of the shoulder: a narrative review. Diagnostics. 2022; 12(12): 3097.
10.3390/diagnostics12123097
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
33Tate AR, McClure PW, Young IA, Salvatori R, Michener LA. Comprehensive impairment-based exercise and manual therapy intervention for patients with subacromial impingement syndrome: a case series. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010; 40(8): 474-493.
10.2519/jospt.2010.3223
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
34Kamonseki DH, Haik MN, Ribeiro LP, Almeida RF, Camargo PR. Scapular movement training is not superior to standardized exercises in the treatment of individuals with chronic shoulder pain and scapular dyskinesis: randomized controlled trial. Disabil Rehabil. 2022; 1-11: 1-11.
10.1080/09638288.2022.2114552
Google Scholar
35Hotta GH, Queiroz POP, de Lemos TW, Rossi DM, de Oliveira SR, de Oliveira AS. Immediate effect of scapula-focused exercises performed with kinematic biofeedback on scapular kinematics in individuals with subacromial pain syndrome. Clin Biomech. 2018; 58: 7-13.
10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2018.07.004
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
36Rodeo SA, Nguyen JT, Cavanaugh JT, Patel Y, Adler RS. Clinical and ultrasonographic evaluations of the shoulders of elite swimmers. Am J Sports Med. 2016; 44(12): 3214-3221.
10.1177/0363546516657823
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
37Tate A, Sarver J, DiPaola L, Yim J, Paul R, Thomas SJ. Changes in clinical measures and tissue adaptations in collegiate swimmers across a competitive season. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020; 29(11): 2375-2384.
10.1016/j.jse.2020.03.028
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
38Riley G, Harrall R, Constant C, Chard M, Cawston T, Hazleman B. Glycosaminoglycans of human rotator cuff tendons: changes with age and in chronic rotator cuff tendinitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1994; 53(6): 367-376.
10.1136/ard.53.6.367
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
39Riley G, Harrall R, Constant C, Chard M, Cawston T, Hazleman B. Tendon degeneration and chronic shoulder pain: changes in the collagen composition of the human rotator cuff tendons in rotator cuff tendinitis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1994; 53(6): 359-366.
10.1136/ard.53.6.359
CAS PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
40Trauzeddel R, Windschall D, Trauzeddel RF, et al. Arthrosonographic reference values of the shoulder joint in healthy children and adolescents: a cross-sectional multicentre ultrasound study. Klin Padiatr. 2017; 229(5): 293-301.
10.1055/s-0043-111596
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
41Manske RC, Lewis S, Wolff S, Smith B. Effects of a dry-land strengthening program in competitive adolescent swimmers. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2015; 10(6): 858-867.
PubMed Google Scholar
42Ramsi M, Swanik KA, Straub S, Mattacola C. Shoulder-rotator strength of high school swimmers over the course of a competitive season. J Sport Rehabil. 2004; 13(1): 9-18.
10.1123/jsr.13.1.9
Web of Science® Google Scholar
43Habechian FA, Van Malderen K, Camargo PR, Cools AM. Changes in shoulder girdle strength in 3 consecutive years in elite adolescent swimmers: a longitudinal cohort study. Braz J Phys Ther. 2018; 22(3): 238-247.
10.1016/j.bjpt.2018.01.001
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
44Kibler WB, Ludewig PM, McClure PW, Michener LA, Bak K, Sciascia AD. Clinical implications of scapular dyskinesis in shoulder injury: the 2013 consensus statement from the ‘scapular summit’. Br J Sports Med. 2013; 47(14): 877-885.
10.1136/bjsports-2013-092425
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar
45Ben Kibler W. The role of the scapula in athletic shoulder function. Am J Sports Med. 1998; 26(2): 325-337.
10.1177/03635465980260022801
PubMed Web of Science® Google Scholar

Volume16, Issue1

January 2024

Pages 47-53

This article also appears in:

Sports Medicine

Shoulder structures and strength in competitive preadolescent swimmers: A longitudinal ultrasonographic study