↓ Skip to main content

Evidence‐based rehabilitation of athletes with glenohumeral instability

Overview of attention for article published in Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
13 X users
facebook
10 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
58 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
583 Mendeley
Title
Evidence‐based rehabilitation of athletes with glenohumeral instability
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, December 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00167-015-3940-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ann M. Cools, Dorien Borms, Birgit Castelein, Fran Vanderstukken, Fredrik R. Johansson

Abstract

To give an overview of current knowledge and guidelines with respect to evidence-based rehabilitation of athletes with glenohumeral instability. This narrative review combines scientific evidence with clinical guidelines based on the current literature to highlight the different components of the rehabilitation of glenohumeral instability. Depending on the specific characteristics of the instability pattern, the severity, recurrence, and direction, the therapeutic approach may be adapted to the needs and demands of the athlete. In general, attention should go to (1) restoration of rotator cuff strength and inter-muscular balance, focusing on the eccentric capacity of the external rotators, (2) normalization of rotational range of motion with special attention to the internal rotation ROM, (3) optimization of the flexibility and muscle performance of the scapular muscles, and (4) gradually increasing the functional sport-specific load on the shoulder girdle. The functional kinetic chain should be implemented throughout all stages of the rehabilitation program. Return to play should be based on subjective assessment as well as objective measurements of ROM, strength, and function. This paper summarizes evidence-based guidelines for treatment of glenohumeral instability. These guidelines may assist the clinician in the prevention and rehabilitation of the overhead athlete. Expert opinion, Level V.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 583 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Unknown 579 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 125 21%
Student > Bachelor 114 20%
Student > Doctoral Student 39 7%
Other 37 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 5%
Other 97 17%
Unknown 139 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 153 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 141 24%
Sports and Recreations 94 16%
Engineering 9 2%
Arts and Humanities 5 <1%
Other 28 5%
Unknown 153 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 September 2019.
All research outputs
#2,454,473
of 25,246,334 outputs
Outputs from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#228
of 2,905 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,404
of 402,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
#7
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,246,334 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,905 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 402,900 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.