The purpose of this study was to compare the shoulder resultant joint moment (RJM) during a shoulder internal rotator exercise using elastic resistance employing four different movement strategies and two different starting elastic strains. Methods: Ten subjects aged 27.4 ± 2.6 yr (5 female and 5 male) with no previous shoulder pathology performed four sets of six repetitions of shoulder rotation though 180° using elastic resistance (Thera-Band® elastic band, blue) during two acceleration (medium and low) and two cadence (2s:2s, <1s:1s) strategies at 0% elastic starting strain. The acceleration movement strategies were also performed with starting strain of 30%. A mathematical model using Newtonian mechanics was used to compute the RJM. Elastic band recoil force was measured with a force transducer. Forearm acceleration was determined by a miniature uniaxial accelerometer secured at the wrist. Electrogoniometer data were collected to determine the range of motion (ROM) as well as the angle between the forearm and band which was used to determine elastic moment arm. Paired t-tests were used to identify joint angle specific RJM differences between conditions. Results: Angle specific comparisons revealed that RJM in the moderate acceleration movement strategy was significantly different from RJM in the low acceleration movement strategy through 150° (83%) of range of motion (p<0.05). Shoulder RJM was up to 111% higher in the moderate acceleration strategy (P < 0.01). Angle specific comparisons revealed RJM in the <1:1 cadence strategy was significantly different from RJM in the 2:2 cadence through 108° (60%) of the range of motion (p<0.05). RJM was up to 47% higher in the <1:1 cadence (p<0.01). RJM in the low acceleration strategy was significantly greater with 30% elastic start strain relative to 0% elastic start strain through 180º of angular excursion (p<0.001). The pattern and magnitude of neuromuscular loading was significantly different in higher acceleration movement strategies (moderate acceleration and fast cadence). Conclusions: These findings indicate that differential limb acceleration as a result of movement strategy significantly affects shoulder load during elastic resistance exercise. The pattern and magnitude of load was different in each movement strategy and could result in differential neuromuscular adaptation through training. Clinicians and exercise professionals should consider movement strategy/acceleration as an important factor when prescribing elastic resistance exercise for safety and efficacy. / October 2006

The purpose of this study was to compare the shoulder resultant joint moment (RJM) during a shoulder internal rotator exercise using elastic resistance employing four different movement strategies and two different starting elastic strains. Methods: Ten subjects aged 27.4 ± 2.6 yr (5 female and 5 male) with no previous shoulder pathology performed four sets of six repetitions of shoulder rotation though 180° using elastic resistance (Thera-Band® elastic band, blue) during two acceleration (medium and low) and two cadence (2s:2s, <1s:1s) strategies at 0% elastic starting strain. The acceleration movement strategies were also performed with starting strain of 30%. A mathematical model using Newtonian mechanics was used to compute the RJM. Elastic band recoil force was measured with a force transducer. Forearm acceleration was determined by a miniature uniaxial accelerometer secured at the wrist. Electrogoniometer data were collected to determine the range of motion (ROM) as well as the angle between the forearm and band which was used to determine elastic moment arm. Paired t-tests were used to identify joint angle specific RJM differences between conditions. Results: Angle specific comparisons revealed that RJM in the moderate acceleration movement strategy was significantly different from RJM in the low acceleration movement strategy through 150° (83%) of range of motion (p<0.05). Shoulder RJM was up to 111% higher in the moderate acceleration strategy (P < 0.01). Angle specific comparisons revealed RJM in the <1:1 cadence strategy was significantly different from RJM in the 2:2 cadence through 108° (60%) of the range of motion (p<0.05). RJM was up to 47% higher in the <1:1 cadence (p<0.01). RJM in the low acceleration strategy was significantly greater with 30% elastic start strain relative to 0% elastic start strain through 180º of angular excursion (p<0.001). The pattern and magnitude of neuromuscular loading was significantly different in higher acceleration movement strategies (moderate acceleration and fast cadence). Conclusions: These findings indicate that differential limb acceleration as a result of movement strategy significantly affects shoulder load during elastic resistance exercise. The pattern and magnitude of load was different in each movement strategy and could result in differential neuromuscular adaptation through training. Clinicians and exercise professionals should consider movement strategy/acceleration as an important factor when prescribing elastic resistance exercise for safety and efficacy.

The purpose of this study was to compare the shoulder resultant joint moment (RJM) during a shoulder internal rotator exercise using elastic resistance employing four different movement strategies and two different starting elastic strains. Methods: Ten subjects aged 27.4 ± 2.6 yr (5 female and 5 male) with no previous shoulder pathology performed four sets of six repetitions of shoulder rotation though 180° using elastic resistance (Thera-Band® elastic band, blue) during two acceleration (medium and low) and two cadence (2s:2s, <1s:1s) strategies at 0% elastic starting strain. The acceleration movement strategies were also performed with starting strain of 30%. A mathematical model using Newtonian mechanics was used to compute the RJM. Elastic band recoil force was measured with a force transducer. Forearm acceleration was determined by a miniature uniaxial accelerometer secured at the wrist. Electrogoniometer data were collected to determine the range of motion (ROM) as well as the angle between the forearm and band which was used to determine elastic moment arm. Paired t-tests were used to identify joint angle specific RJM differences between conditions. Results: Angle specific comparisons revealed that RJM in the moderate acceleration movement strategy was significantly different from RJM in the low acceleration movement strategy through 150° (83%) of range of motion (p<0.05). Shoulder RJM was up to 111% higher in the moderate acceleration strategy (P < 0.01). Angle specific comparisons revealed RJM in the <1:1 cadence strategy was significantly different from RJM in the 2:2 cadence through 108° (60%) of the range of motion (p<0.05). RJM was up to 47% higher in the <1:1 cadence (p<0.01). RJM in the low acceleration strategy was significantly greater with 30% elastic start strain relative to 0% elastic start strain through 180º of angular excursion (p<0.001). The pattern and magnitude of neuromuscular loading was significantly different in higher acceleration movement strategies (moderate acceleration and fast cadence). Conclusions: These findings indicate that differential limb acceleration as a result of movement strategy significantly affects shoulder load during elastic resistance exercise. The pattern and magnitude of load was different in each movement strategy and could result in differential neuromuscular adaptation through training. Clinicians and exercise professionals should consider movement strategy/acceleration as an important factor when prescribing elastic resistance exercise for safety and efficacy.