Driving around bends with or without shoulders: The influence of bend direction

Paved shoulders have long been used to create “forgiving” roads where drivers can maintain control of their vehicles even when as they drift out of the lane. While the safety benefits of shoulders have been well documented, their effects on driver behavior around curves have scarcely been examined. The purpose of this paper is to fill this gap by assessing whether the addition of shoulders affects driver behavior differently as a function of bend direction. Driver behavior in a driving simulator was analyzed on left and right curves of two-lane rural roads in the presence and absence of 0.75-m and 1.25-m shoulders. The results demonstrated significant changes in drivers’ lateral control when shoulders were provided. In the absence of oncoming traffic, the shoulders caused participants to deviate more toward the inner lane edge at curve entry, at the apex and at the innermost position on right bends but not left ones. In the presence of oncoming traffic, this also occurred at the apex and the innermost position, leading participants to spend more time off the lane on right curves. Participants did not slow down in either traffic condition to compensate for steering farther inside, thereby increasing the risk of lane departure on right curves equipped with shoulders. These findings highlight the direction-specific influence of shoulders on a driver’s steering control when driving around bends. They provide arguments supporting the idea that drivers view paved shoulders as a new field of safe travel on right curves. Recommendations are made to encourage drivers to keep their vehicle within the lane on right bends and to prevent potential interference with cyclists when a shoulder is present.     

No Relationship Between Joint Position Sense and Force Sense at the Shoulder

In practice, a single test is used to quantify an individual's proprioception. Previous studies have not found a correlation between joint position sense (JPS) and force sense (FS), which are submodalities of proprioception. The purpose of the present study is to determine if root mean square (RMS) error in JPS and FS are related at the shoulder, controlling for external load and elevation angle. Active shoulder angle and force reproduction protocols were performed. No correlation was found between JPS and FS (r = –.019, p = .941) nor were any individual angle and load combinations significant. The main effect for angle in JPS was significant (p < .001). Follow-up contrast demonstrated a significant (p < .001) decrease in RMS error with increased elevation. A significant load by angle interaction was found for FS (p = .014). Follow-up simple effects tests by angle demonstrated RMS error decreased with load at 50° and 70° but not at 90°. By load, RMS error only decreased for 120% between 50° and 90°. JPS and FS demonstrate different behavior with load and angle. This differing behavior is more likely responsible for the lack of correlation than angle and load differences in JPS and FS protocols.     

Standard and Short RoM Isokinetic Testing: Comparative Analysis in Identifying Submaximal Shoulder External Rotator Effort

An isokinetic-related parameter termed the difference between eccentric-concentric strength ratios at two distinct test velocities (DEC) based on 60° (standard) range of motion (RoM) has been proven to be highly efficient detecting feigned muscular efforts. This study aimed to verify whether a DEC derived from a much shorter test RoM (20°) was equally useful than a long RoM–derived one. Eighteen healthy men (32.4 ± 6.4 years old) took part in a study focusing on shoulder external rotation isokinetic strength. Participants performed a genuine shoulder external rotator maximal effort (eight pairs of concentric and eccentric contractions at high and low velocities at short and long RoM) and then instructed to feign maximal effort. Contraction velocities were adjusted accordingly by applying a 1:4 gradient and peak moments registered. Both condition DEC was then calculated by subtracting the eccentric and concentric strength ratios at low velocities from those at high velocities. DEC scores in the feigned effort were significantly higher than maximal effort ones in both conditions in men. It enabled the setting of specific cutoff levels for separating the efforts. Both approaches revealed a coincident sensitivity (78%) whereas short RoM showed an even higher specificity: 88% versus 78%. Thus, the short RoM protocol provides clinically acceptable detection power.     

Movement Variability Increases With Shoulder Pain When Compensatory Strategies of the Upper Body Are Constrained

This cross-sectional study analyzed the influence of chronic shoulder pain (CSP) on movement variability/kinematics during humeral elevation, with the trunk and elbow motions constrained to avoid compensatory strategies. For this purpose, 37 volunteers with CSP as the injured group (IG) and 58 participants with asymptomatic shoulders as the control group (CG) participated in the study. Maximum humeral elevation (Emax), maximum angular velocity (Velmax), variability of the maximum angle (CVEmax), functional variability (Func_var), and approximate entropy (ApEn) were calculated from the kinematic data. Patients' pain was measured on the visual analogue scale (VAS). Compared with the CG, the IG presented lower Emax and Velmax and higher variability (i.e., CVEmax, Func_var, and ApEn). Moderate correlations were achieved for the VAS score and the kinematic variables Emax, Velmax and variability of curve analysis, Func_varm, and ApEn. No significant correlation was found for CVEmax. In conclusion, CSP results in a decrease of angle and velocity and an increased shoulder movement variability when the neuromuscular system cannot use compensatory strategies to avoid painful positions.