
1st STUDENT SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE OF THE BRAZILIAN ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH AND POSTGRADUATE IN PHYSIOTHERAPY (ABRAPG-FT)
Mais dadosSubacromial Pain Syndrome (SPS) is a prevalent musculoskeletal shoulder disorder. Shoulder pain in overhead athletes is often associated with sport-specific demands and changes in strength, flexibility, and posture at the shoulder and along the upper limb. Crossfit is a popular sport with a high prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders, including in the shoulder. Therefore, identifying performance and physical impairments in the shoulder of Crossfit practitioners with SPS may contribute to a better understanding of the high prevalence of this disorder.
ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the shoulder's physical performance and clinical measures between Crossfit practitioners with and without SPS.
MethodsAn observational cross-sectional study was conducted in CrossFit boxes in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Twenty participants with SPS and 23 participants without SPS were included. Participants performed upper limb physical performance tests (Closed Kinetic Chain Upper Extremity Stability Test, Seated Medicine Ball Throw Test, Upper Quarter Y-Balance Test). Range of motion and isometric muscle strength were also investigated.
Self-reported pain, disability. Possible differences between groups were investigated using the independent sample t-test (two tailed).
ResultsThere was no statistically significant difference between groups for upper limb physical performance tests, shoulder range of motion and isometric strength. The result of the SPADI in the SDSA group was 30.7% (23.62) for pain, 16.46% (19.24) for disability, and a total score of 21.92% (20.22).
ConclusionCrossfit practitioners with and without SPS presented similar upper limb physical performance.
ImplicationsSubacromial pain syndrome may not influence performance on physical tests, strength level, and upper quadrant range of motion in CrossFit practitioners. Including crossfit-specific movements in the physical assessment can complement the physical evaluation.
Conflict of interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Acknowledgment: This study was supported by CAPES (Code 001; No. 88881.708719/2022-01, and No. 88887.708718/2022-00) and the FAPERJ (No. E-26/211.104/2021)
Ethics committee approval: Augusto Motta University Centre (UNISUAM); CAAE: 48948621.3.0000.5235.