Background: Musculoskeletal complaints (MSCs) may be more common in individuals with brachial plexus injury (BPI), whose physical work demands exceed their functional capacity (FC).
Objectives: (a) To assess the concurrent validity of five methods for measuring upper extremity work demands and the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT). (b) To explore the relations between MSCs, physical work demands, and FC in individuals with BPI.
Background: To enable (pain free) functioning, individuals with brachial plexus injury (BPI) may require a higher functional capacity compared to two-handed individuals, because the load on unaffected structures is greater.
Objective: This study compared the functional capacity of individuals with BPI and healthy controls and explored differences in the functional capacity of BPI-affected individuals with respect to: those with and without hand function; affected and unaffected sides; with and without musculoskeletal complaints (MSCs).
Methods: Six functional capacity tests adjusted for one-handed function were performed by 23 BPI-affected individuals and 20 healthy controls.
Purpose: (1) To determine the prevalence of musculoskeletal complaints (MSCs) in the non-affected bodily structures in individuals with brachial plexus injury (BPI) and (2) to analyse factors associated with MSCs and disability.
Methods: Survey among individuals with BPI and a control group. Multivariable logistic and linear regression analyses were used to identify factors associated with MSCs or disability.
Study Design: Reliability study.
Introduction: Quantifying compensatory movements during work-related tasks may help to prevent musculoskeletal complaints in individuals with upper limb absence.
Purpose Of The Study: (1) To develop a qualitative scoring system for rating compensatory shoulder and trunk movements in upper limb prosthesis wearers during the performance of functional capacity evaluation tests adjusted for use by 1-handed individuals (functional capacity evaluation-one handed [FCE-OH]); (2) to examine the interrater and intrarater reliability of the scoring system; and (3) to assess its feasibility.