ArticleInternational journal of sports physical therapy2026
Bilateral Comparison of Passive Shoulder Horizontal Adduction Range of Motion in Elite Tennis Players.
Article in International journal of sports physical therapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Elite level tennis players subject their dominant extremity to high levels of repetitive eccentric deceleration as the shoulder undergoes extensive internal rotation and cross arm adduction, placing large demands on posterior shoulder structures. While the associated loss of dominant (D) arm internal rotation range of motion (ROM) relative to the non-dominant (ND) arm has been extensively studied and quantified among overhead athletes, horizontal adduction (HADD) loss has been far less explored in current literature. The purpose of this study was to objectively measure passive D and ND HADD ROM and examine differences in D-ND HADD ROM in elite tennis players. The authors hypothesized that significantly lower D shoulder HADD ROM compared to the ND upper extremity would be observed in both male and female elite tennis players at all ages. Study Design: Cross-sectional observational study. Methods: A total of 317 uninjured, elite-level tennis players were assessed for differences between D-ND HADD passive ROM using a digital inclinometer. Subjects volunteered to participate and were currently training and competing. Subjects were divided into two groups by age (12 to 17, and 18 and over). Subjects were positioned supine while a single physiotherapist stabilized the ipsilateral scapula and performed all measurements without applied overpressure. A descriptive analysis was performed, with paired-samples t-tests examining D-ND differences within each group and independent-samples t-tests comparing the deficit between age groups. Results: There were (178 males and 139 females) measured in this investigation. Significantly less D arm HADD was measured compared to the ND arm in male (7.58±6.97°) (p<0.001) and female players (3.80±6.01°) (p<.0001). Additionally, the D-ND deficit was significantly larger in 18-30-year-old male players (8.2°) than in junior males (4.7°) (p = 0.005), whereas the deficit in female players was not statistically different across age groups (p = 0.71). Conclusion: The results of this descriptive study demonstrate a significant decrease in D arm HADD ROM in elite tennis players compared to the ND arm. Larger differences were measured in older male players, likely associated with the increased number of years played with this population. Decreased HADD likely represents the chronic adaptations that develop in the posterior shoulder structures with extensive repetitions required for skill development and training. Level of Evidence: 3.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.