Instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization in adhesive capsulitis: A randomized clinical trial

The effectiveness of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization on range of motion: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effectiveness of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) on range of motion (ROM).

METHODS

We performed a literature search of the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from inception to December 23, 2023. Randomized controlled trials that compared treatment groups receiving IASTM to controls or IASTM plus another treatment(s) to other treatment(s) among healthy individuals with or without ROM deficits, or patients with musculoskeletal disorders were included. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Nine trials including 450 participants were included in the quantitative analysis. The IASTM was effective in improving ROM in degree in healthy individuals with ROM deficits and patients with musculoskeletal disorders (n=4) (MD = 4.94, 95% CI: 3.29 to 6.60), and in healthy individuals without ROM deficits (n=4) (MD = 2.32, 95% CI: 1.30 to 3.34), but failed to improve ROM in centimeter in healthy individuals with ROM deficits (n=1) (MD = 0.39, 95% CI: -1.34 to 2.11, p=0.66, I2 = 88%).

CONCLUSIONS

IASTM can improve ROM in degree in healthy individuals with or without ROM deficits, or in patients with musculoskeletal disorders (with very low to low certainty).

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The PROSPERO registration ID is CRD42023425200.

Study on the effect of blood flow restriction training combined with IASTAM on ankle strength and function intervention in athletes with chronic ankle instability in sport dance events

BACKGROUND

Athletes engaged in sports dance frequently encounter the potential for ankle injuries and instability, factors that may contribute to diminished training efficacy, compromised athletic performance, prolonged recuperation, and heightened susceptibility to recurring injuries.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of an exercise intervention (comprising blood flow restriction training combined with low-load ankle muscle strength training and balance training) as well as instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization (IASTM) on the foot and ankle function, strength, and range of motion in sports dance athletes exhibiting ankle instability (CAI).

METHODS

Thirty participants exhibiting ankle instability, restriction, or discomfort were recruited and randomly assigned to two groups: the Test group (comprising blood flow restriction training combined with IASTM, n = 15) and the traditional ankle strength training group (n = 15). The intervention spanned 4 weeks, with one session per week. Assessment of the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT), Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), and ankle range of motion occurred at three time points: pre-intervention, immediately following the initial intervention, and after 4 weeks of intervention. Ankle strength testing was conducted solely before and after the intervention for comparative analysis.

RESULTS

There were no significant variances in baseline characteristics between the two intervention groups. In terms of CAIT scores, both groups exhibited notably higher scores following the initial intervention and after 4 weeks of intervention compared to pre-intervention (P < 0.05). The Test group displayed higher CAIT scores than the control group, signifying a more pronounced enhancement in ankle stability among patients in the Test group. Concerning FAAM scores, both groups significantly enhanced ankle function in CAI patients (P < 0.05), with the Test group demonstrating notably higher FAAM-SPORT scores than the control group (P < 0.05), indicating superior restoration of athletic capability in the Test group. As for improvements in ankle range of motion, both groups demonstrated significant enhancements compared to pre-intervention (P < 0.05). The Test group exhibited significantly superior improvements in dorsiflexion, eversion, and inversion range of motion compared to the control group (P < 0.05), while the control group did not exhibit significant enhancements in plantarflexion and eversion range of motion (P > 0.05). Both groups displayed enhanced ankle strength in CAI patients following the intervention (P < 0.05), with the Test group manifesting notably higher dorsiflexion and inversion strength than the control group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Both blood flow restriction training combined with IASTM and traditional ankle strength and stability training have shown significant improvements in stability, function, strength, and range of motion in CAI patients. Furthermore, the Test group exhibits superior efficacy in ankle stability, daily functional movement, dorsiflexion, and eversion range of motion compared to the control group.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

9 February 2024, ClinicalTrials.gov, ID; NCT06251414.

Effectiveness of instrument-assisted soft tissue mobilization for the management of upper body, lower body, and spinal conditions. An updated systematic review with meta-analyses

PURPOSE

To critically appraise randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on Instrument-Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilisation (IASTM) and quantify the effects of IASTM compared with other treatment individuals with or without pathologies on function, pain, and range of motion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We search four electronic databases from January 1999 to January 2022 and included RCTs of healthy participants/athletes and people with upper, lower, or spinal conditions, who received IASTM versus other active treatment for clinical outcomes (function, pain, and range of motion).

RESULTS

Forty-six RCTs were considered eligible for data analysis. Effects of IASTM plus other treatment versus other treatment on function and pain intensity were not statistically significant or clinically meaningful (very low quality, SMD -0.28, 95% CI -0.66 to 0.09) and (very low quality, SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.53 to 0.43) at up to one-year follow-up respectively. No clinically meaningful improvements were found on range of motion outcomes. Out of the 46 included RCTs, only 10 assessed and reported IASTM-related adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Evidence of very low-quality certainty does not support the efficacy of IASTM in individuals with or without various pathologies on function, pain, and range of motion in the management of upper body, lower body, or spinal conditions. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe included RCTs had a high risk of bias and were assessed as very-low quality evidence for all the included outcomes.IASTM does not lead to clinically meaningful improvements in function, pain, or range of motion in individuals with upper body, lower body, and spinal conditions.The publication of IASTM trials in suspected predatory journals is increasing.The available evidence on IASTM does not support its use to improve function, pain, or range of motion in individuals with upper body, lower body, and spinal conditions.Health care practitioners should consider other evidence-based management strategies (physical activity and exercise) to improve function, pain, or range of motion in individuals with musculoskeletal injuries and disorders.Given the rise of publications on IASTM in suspected predatory journals, health care practitioners should be judicious to examine the legitimacy of a journal when searching for evidence on IASTM treatment technique.

Exercise Therapy is Effective for Improvement in Range of Motion, Function, and Pain in Patients With Frozen Shoulder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE(S)

To determine (1) the effect of exercise therapy alone or in combination with other interventions compared with solely exercises and programs with or without exercises and (2) what kind of exercise therapy or combination with other interventions is most effective.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were screened in a 2-phase approach by 2 independent reviewers (M.M. and L.M.). Reference lists of included studies and interesting systematic reviews were hand searched.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers (M.M. and L.M.) extracted information about origin, characteristics of study participants, eligibility criteria, characteristics of interventions, outcome measures and main results in a pre-defined template.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Thirty-three studies were included in the qualitative and 19 in the meta-analysis. Preliminary evidence was found for supervised exercises to be more beneficial than home exercises for ROM and function. Multimodal programs comprising exercises may result in little to no difference in ROM compared to solely exercises. Programs comprising muscle energy techniques show little to no difference in ROM when compared with programs with other exercises. Adding stretches to a multimodal program with exercises may increase ROM. There is uncertain evidence that there is a difference between those programs regarding function and pain. Preliminary evidence was found for several treatment programs including exercises to be beneficial for improvement in both passive and active ROM, function, pain, and muscle strength. No studies used patient satisfaction as an outcome measure.

CONCLUSIONS

ROM, function, and pain improve with both solely exercises and programs with exercises, but for ROM and pain there was little to no difference between programs and for function the evidence was uncertain. Adding exercises improve active ROM compared with a program without exercises, whereas adding physical modalities has no beneficial effect. Muscle energy techniques are a beneficial type of exercise therapy for improving function compared with other types of exercise. Unfortunately, no conclusion can be drawn about the results in the long-term and most effective dose of exercise therapy.