Skip to main content

Table 1 External rotational glenohumeral torque [Nm] of three remplissage techniques compared to intact native specimens

From: Effect of three remplissage techniques on tendon coverage and shoulder kinematics: a navigated robotic biomechanical study

0° gh-Abduction Mean [Nm] SD 95 % CI for Mean p-value
Lower Bound Upper Bound
0° ER Intact 0 0.01 0 0.01  
  Knot (T1) 0 0.04 −0.03 0.04 n.s.
  Pully (T2) −0.01 0.03 −0.04 0.02 n.s.
  Tape (T3) 0 0.01 −0.01 0.02 n.s.
30° ER Intact 0.04 0.06 −0.02 0.1  
  Knot (T1) 0.09 0.13 −0.02 0.21 n.s.
  Pully (T2) 0.17 0.18 0.01 0.34 n.s.
  Tape (T3) 0.12 0.13 0 0.24 n.s.
60° ER Intact 0.04 0.14 −0.09 0.17  
  Knot (T1) 0.2 0.33 −0.1 0.5 n.s.
  Pully (T2) 0.26 0.25 0.03 0.5 n.s.
  Tape (T3) 0.21 0.33 −0.1 0.52 n.s.
30° gh-Abduction
0° ER Intact 0 0.01 −0.01 0.01  
  Knot (T1) −0.02 0.02 −0.04 0.01 n.s.
  Pully (T2) −0.02 0.04 −0.06 0.01 n.s.
  Tape (T3) −0.01 0.02 −0.03 0.01 n.s.
30° ER Intact 0.05 0.06 0 0.11  
  Knot (T1) 0.08 0.06 0.02 0.14 n.s.
  Pully (T2) 0.15 0.14 0.02 0.28 n.s.
  Tape (T3) 0.08 0.07 0.02 0.14 n.s.
60° ER Intact 0.06 0.11 −0.05 0.17  
  Knot (T1) 0.1 0.13 −0.02 0.23 n.s.
  Pully (T2) 0.17 0.14 0.04 0.3 n.s.
  Tape (T3) 0.09 0.09 0.01 0.17 n.s.
60° gh-Abduction
0° ER Intact 0 0.01 −0.02 0.01  
  Knot (T1) 0 0.02 −0.01 0.02 n.s.
  Pully (T2) 0 0.02 −0.02 0.02 n.s.
  Tape (T3) 0.01 0.02 −0.01 0.02 n.s.
30° ER Intact 0.05 0.06 0 0.11  
  Knot (T1) 0.13 0.08 0.06 0.2 0.05
  Pully (T2) 0.14 0.07 0.08 0.2 0.02
  Tape (T3) 0.14 0.1 0.05 0.23 0.02
60° ER Intact 0.05 0.09 −0.03 0.13  
  Knot (T1) 0.15 0.11 0.05 0.25 0.02
  Pully (T2) 0.18 0.1 0.08 0.28 0.04
  Tape (T3) 0.15 0.07 0.08 0.21 0.00