Pre-op instrument · shoulder girdle

Everyone is taught 2:1. No increment is ever 2:1.

Scapulohumeral rhythm has an overall ratio close to two to one, and that number describes almost nothing you will actually measure. The scapula supplies about two and a half per cent of the first thirty degrees of elevation and about fifty-three per cent of the arc from ninety to a hundred and twenty. In the series those figures come from, the ratio between thirty and ninety degrees ranged from 1.64 to 3.76 and was never once equal to two to one.

Measure this girdle → Why this is the whole thesis in miniature →
Total elevation, then elevation with the scapula held · the difference is the girdle’s share
The point

This is the safe-zone error, at a much smaller scale.

The thesis on this site argues that orthopaedics repeatedly took a population average and applied it to individuals as though the two were the same thing — a neutral mechanical axis, a fixed cup safe zone, a neutral sagittal target. Scapulohumeral rhythm is the same mistake in a much smaller and much more everyday form, and it is taught in every shoulder examination.

Arc segmentScapular shareWhat is happening
0–30°≈ 2.5%The setting phase. The scapula barely participates and a 2:1 expectation here is simply the wrong expectation
30–60°≈ 30%The scapula begins to contribute
60–90°≈ 38%Contribution rising
90–120°≈ 52.7%The scapula now supplies more than half of this segment
120–180°≈ 50%**Beyond the measured range. Extrapolated, and flagged as such throughout
What that means practically. A scapular share is only interpretable against the part of the arc it was measured in. This instrument therefore asks which arc you assessed and compares the share to that segment, rather than to one ratio. That is the only change, and it is the same change the knee, hip and spine each made for themselves.
The envelope · elevation, then elevation with the scapula held

The adjacent segment here is the scapulothoracic articulation.

The glenohumeral page on this site asks an attrition question about the same shoulder — how far the glenoid has eroded from its premorbid surface. This page asks a coupled question about the same anatomy. Both are legitimate and they belong to different families, which is a point the thesis had to be corrected on.

The two measurements

Total humerothoracic elevation, then the same with the scapula manually stabilised.
140°
What the arm does.
70°
What the joint does. The difference is the girdle.
165°
The only total-arc reference that belongs to this patient.

Which arc you assessed

Because the expected share depends entirely on this.
140°
Expected scapular share for this arc
Tier C

What the girdle is actually supplying

Log this girdle →The glenoid instrument →
The four tiers

A scapula can fail by doing too much as easily as too little.

Honest limits. Manual scapular stabilisation is an imperfect way to isolate glenohumeral motion and puts the examiner inside the measurement. Clinical instruments capture scapular kinematics in two dimensions only. The expected shares come from a single inclinometer series and the segment above 120 degrees is extrapolated. No mandatory CMS episode reaches the shoulder girdle. Not a cleared device, not clinical advice.
Log this girdle

Put the first row in.

The measurements above are attached. Contact details only.

Telemetry for calibration, not a clinical record. No patient identifiers.