A discussion is presented concerning scoring while assessing shoulder function. Divergence in observation and in interpretation of what is observed may give rise to serious disagreement about indications for surgery. Agreement regarding starting points of measurement is essential. One must realize that the number of degrees, obtained using a scoring system, may not reflect the real amount of motion per se, it may solely indicate the limit of the motion in relation to the neutral zero point of the measurement. This realization may improve the justification of and the indication for surgical treatment.
It is worthy of mention that this paper deals in particular with active external rotation. Indications for secondary surgery to prevent gleno-humeral deformation if passive external rotation is diminishing progressively, is a separate topic. We wish to point out that the insidious problem of fixed deformity, even to a minor degree, will contribute to the problem of loss of active functional movement.
*This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
1 Bahm J. Changes in rotatory movements of the shoulder after obstetric brachial plexus lesion: clinical condition, surgery, and analysis of objective prognostic factors. Thesis; Université Libre de Bruxelles: 2011
2 Mallet J. Paralysie obstétricale du plexus brachial. II. Traitement des séquelles. Primauté du traitement de l’épaule. Méthodes d’expression des résultats. Rev Chir Orthop 1972; 58 (suppl 1) 166-168 4263979
6 Heck CV, Hendryson IE, Rowe CR. Joint motion. Method of measuring and recording. New York 1965 and reprinted by The British Orthopaedic Association; Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, London: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 1966
7 Gerhardt JJ, Cocchiarella L, Lea RD. The practical guide to range of motion assessment. American Medical Association, printed in the U.S.A.; : 1st edition 2002: 52-55
8 Rondinelli RD, Genovese E, Katz RT, Mayer TG, Mueller KL, Ranavaya MI, Brigham CR. Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment. American Medical Association (AMAPress); : 6th edition 2008: 472-476
9 Pondaag W, de Boer R, van Wijlen-Hempel MS, Hofstede-Buitenhuis SM, Malessy MJA. External rotation as a result of suprascapular nerve neurotization in obstetric brachial plexus lesions. Neurosurgery 2005; 57: 530-537 10.1227/01.NEU.0000170557.13788.D2 16145533
10 Van Ouwerkerk WJR, Uitdenhaag BMJ, Strijers RLM, Frans N, Holl K, Fellner FA, Vandertop WP. Accessory nerve to suprascapular nerve transfer to restore shoulder exorotation in otherwise spontaneously recovered obstetrical brachial plexus lesions. Neurosurgery 2006; 59: 858-869 10.1227/01.NEU.0000232988.46219.E4 17038950
11 Schaakxs D, Bahm J, Sellhaus B, Weis J. Clinical and neuropathological study about the neurotization of the suprascapular nerve in obstetric brachial plexus lesions. J Brach Plex Peripher Nerve Inj 2009; 4: 15-28 10.1186/1749-7221-4-15
