{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: Shoulder range of motion in competitive tennis players: systematic review and meta-analysis.
{Author}: Garret J;Cuinet T; ;Guillard V;Montalvan B;
{Journal}: JSES Int
{Volume}: 8
{Issue}: 3
{Year}: 2024 May
暂无{DOI}: 10.1016/j.jseint.2024.01.017
{Abstract}: <B>UNASSIGNED: </B>To compare shoulder range of motion (ROM) in dominant vs. nondominant shoulder of competitive tennis players, and to determine whether shoulder ROM is different between younger and older players, or males and females.<BR><B>UNASSIGNED: </B>A search was performed on PubMed, Embase, and Epistemonikos on December 18, 2023. This study conforms to the principles of the Cochrane Collaboration and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. Clinical studies or case reports on shoulder ROM including external rotation (ER; shoulder at 90° of abduction) and internal rotation (IR) in competitive, elite, or professional tennis players.<BR><B>UNASSIGNED: </B>We found 25 eligible studies that reported on a total of 18,534 tennis players, of which 20 studies reported the ROM for the dominant and nondominant side. Comparing dominant vs. nondominant shoulders revealed that dominant shoulders had significantly smaller IR (53.0° vs. 62.6°; P < .001). Comparing adults vs. children revealed that adults have significantly smaller IR (44.5° vs. 57.1°; P < .001) and ER (95.3° vs. 110.3°; P < .001). Comparing females vs. males revealed no significant differences in ER (113.4° vs. 104.9°; P = .360) or IR (54.3° vs. 56.4°; P = .710).<BR><B>UNASSIGNED: </B>IR in shoulders of tennis players is significantly smaller in dominant vs. nondominant sides (53.0° vs. 62.6°, P < .001), and significantly smaller in adults vs. children (44.5° vs. 57.1°, P < .001). These findings could be relevant in the context of physical preparation and training of tennis players, to monitor evolution of IR as a result of their sport and/or as they transition from childhood to adulthood.