Comparison of acromiohumeral distance and glenohumeral internal rotation angle between the empty can test and modified empty can test: "thumb pointing down" versus "elbow pointing laterally".

BACKGROUND: During the empty can test, the direction of the thumb (downward) has been widely used as an instruction for producing glenohumeral internal rotation. However, the combination of forearm pronation and thumb motion as a compensatory movement could contribute to the lack of glenohumeral internal rotation during the empty can test. This study aimed to compare the glenohumeral internal rotation angle between the conventional empty can (with thumb direction) and modified empty can tests (with elbow direction), as well as the acromiohumeral distance between the full can, conventional empty can, and modified empty can tests. METHODS: In this laboratory study, we measured the glenohumeral internal rotation angle using a motion sensor and the acromiohumeral distance using ultrasonography during the following tests: full can test (thumb pointing up), conventional empty can test (thumb pointing down), and modified empty can test (elbow pointing laterally) in 20 healthy subjects. RESULTS: Compared with the conventional empty can test, the glenohumeral internal rotation angle was significantly greater during the modified empty can test (p < 0.05). Furthermore, the acromiohumeral distance measured in the modified empty can test was significantly less than that in the full can test (p < 0.001) and conventional empty can test (p < 0.001). However, there was no difference in the acromiohumeral distance between the full can test and the conventional empty can test (p > 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: During the empty can test, the instructions should be given to patients based on the elbow direction (elbow pointing laterally). The modified empty can test can produce full glenohumeral internal rotation, compared with instructions based on the thumb direction (thumb pointing down). Consequently, the modified empty can test can produce a more decreased subacromial space.

Differences in neck muscle activity according to lying positions using a smartphone.

BACKGROUND: Due to the extended use of smartphones, people spend a lot of time on these devices while lying down. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to compare the differences in neck muscle activity of participants while they watched videos on a smartphone in four different lying positions (supine (SUP), prone on elbows (PE), side lying (SIDE), and 45∘ head turn while side lying (45-SIDE)). METHODS: Twenty-three healthy volunteers (22.4 ± 1.7 years) were enrolled in this study. We assessed the activities of their right and left sternocleidomastoid (SCM), anterior scalene, cervical erector spinae (CES), and upper trapezius (UT) muscles while they watched videos on a smartphone in four different lying positions. RESULTS: The right and left SCM and CES had significantly different muscle activities depending on the lying positions. The SCM activity had a significantly greater asymmetry in the 45-SIDE position, while the CES activity had a significantly greater asymmetry in the SIDE and 45-SIDE positions. Moreover, the UT activity had a significantly greater asymmetry in the SUP, PE, and SIDE positions. CONCLUSIONS: Neck muscle activity and asymmetry were the lowest in the SUP position relative to the other positions. Therefore, lying down in the SUP position may minimize neck muscle activation while using a smartphone.