Comparison of mobilization with supervised exercise for patients with subacromial impingement syndrome

Dosage of joint mobilization for the management of patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Evidence supporting type and dosage of joint mobilizations and rationale for selecting joint mobilization dosage for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain are limited.

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aimed to systematically map the type and dosage of joint mobilizations used in previous trials for managing patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain; and summarize the rationale for adopting a specific joint mobilization dosage.

METHODS

We searched six databases. We included randomised controlled trials using joint mobilization for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. We extracted data regarding technique, treatment joint mobilization dosages and rationale for a specific dosage.

RESULTS

We included 32 studies. Most studies did not or partially report technique (67%) and within-session dosage (64%) of passive joint mobilization. Overall treatment was fully reported in 95% of studies. The dosage used for passive joint mobilization was heterogeneous (ranging from grade I to grade V). Most studies (85%) did not or partially report technique of mobilization with movement (MWM), whereas within-session and overall treatment dosages were fully reported in more than 85% of studies. Three sets of 10 repetitions were commonly used within-session dosage for MWM. We found very limited information on the rationale for selecting dosage of joint mobilization.

CONCLUSION

We found limited information about the dosage or the rationale for selecting joint mobilization, with a heterogeneous dosage being tested across trials. Our findings highlight the importance of detailed reporting for dosage and rationale for selecting a specific dosage of joint mobilization.

Is there 'trustworthy' evidence for using manual therapy to treat patients with shoulder dysfunction?: A systematic review

The primary objective of this review was to create a 'trustworthy,' living systematic review and meta-analysis for the application of manual therapy interventions in treating patients with shoulder dysfunction. Included studies were English-language randomized controlled trials published between 1/1/2010 and 8/3/2023, with searches performed in: PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), CINHAL, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health, EBSCO Medline, and PEDro. The population of focus included adults 18 years and older with musculoskeletal impairments related to shoulder dysfunction. Our primary outcomes included pain and region-specific outcome measures. We excluded trials, including participants having shoulder dysfunction resulting from surgery, radicular pain, instability/dislocation, fracture, lymphedema, and radiation. Our screening methodology was based upon a previously published 'trustworthy' systematic review protocol. This included the application of our PICOTS criteria in addition to screening for prospective clinical trial registration and following of prospective intent, as well as assessment of PEDro scores, risk-of-bias ratings, GRADE scoring, and examination of confidence in estimated effects. Twenty-six randomized controlled trials met our PICOTS criteria; however, only 15 of these were registered. Only three were registered prospectively. Two of these did not have discussions and conclusions that aligned with their primary outcome. The remaining single study was found to have a high risk-of-bias, meaning the remainder of the protocol could not be employed and that no randomized controlled trials could undergo further assessment or meta-analysis. The results of this systematic review indicate there are no 'trustworthy' randomized controlled trials examining the effectiveness of manual therapy interventions for the treatment of patients with shoulder dysfunction, as defined by the prospectively established methodology. Therefore, these findings signal that creating a 'trustworthy,' living systematic review on this clinically relevant topic is not yet possible due to a lack of 'trustworthy' randomized controlled trials.

Efficacy of Interferential Current Therapy in Patients Diagnosed with Subacromial Impingement Syndrome

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of interferential current treatment on a range of motion of joint and shoulder pain, functional status, and quality of life in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome and to compare interferential current with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and sham interferential current.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients complaining of shoulder discomfort participated in the present study. Diagnosis of subacromial impingement syndrome is based on anamnesis, clinical examinations, and shoulder magnetic resonance imaging. A total of 52 patients divided into 3 groups: Group 1 (17 patients, mean age 51.8 years) received interferential current, group 2 (18 patients, mean age 51.8 years) received transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, and group 3 (17 patients, mean age 49.1 years) received sham interferential current. Hot pack and exercise treatments were added to all groups. All groups were treated for 3 weeks, 5 times a week, for 15 sessions and 20 minutes for each session. Evaluations were made before treatment (T0), in the middle of treatment (T1; end of 8th session), and at the end of treatment (T2; end of 15th session) using active range of motion and visual analog scale for pain, the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Problems Questionnaire for functional status, and Short Form-36 for quality of life.

RESULTS

There were significant improvement effects on all of the range of motion, visual analog scale, and the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Problems Questionnaire scores at T2 and on the scores in some subparameters of Short Form-36 in all groups (P < .05). However, there was no statistically significant difference at T2 between the groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Interferential current and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation exhibited equivalent results regarding range of motion, pain, function, and quality of life of patients with subacromial impingement syndrome, with no significant difference between interferential current and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. Adding interferential current or transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation treatments to hot pack +exercise therapy did not result in any extra benefits to the patients.

Exercise therapy for tendinopathy: a mixed-methods evidence synthesis exploring feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness

Background

Tendinopathy is a common, painful and functionally limiting condition, primarily managed conservatively using exercise therapy.

Review questions

(i) What exercise interventions have been reported in the literature for which tendinopathies? (ii) What outcomes have been reported in studies investigating exercise interventions for tendinopathy? (iii) Which exercise interventions are most effective across all tendinopathies? (iv) Does type/location of tendinopathy or other specific covariates affect which are the most effective exercise therapies? (v) How feasible and acceptable are exercise interventions for tendinopathies?

Methods

A scoping review mapped exercise interventions for tendinopathies and outcomes reported to date (questions i and ii). Thereafter, two contingent systematic review workstreams were conducted. The first investigated a large number of studies and was split into three efficacy reviews that quantified and compared efficacy across different interventions (question iii), and investigated the influence of a range of potential moderators (question iv). The second was a convergent segregated mixed-method review (question v). Searches for studies published from 1998 were conducted in library databases (n = 9), trial registries (n = 6), grey literature databases (n = 5) and Google Scholar. Scoping review searches were completed on 28 April 2020 with efficacy and mixed-method search updates conducted on 19 January 2021 and 29 March 2021.

Results

Scoping review - 555 included studies identified a range of exercise interventions and outcomes across a range of tendinopathies, most commonly Achilles, patellar, lateral elbow and rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. Strengthening exercise was most common, with flexibility exercise used primarily in the upper limb. Disability was the most common outcome measured in Achilles, patellar and rotator cuff-related shoulder pain; physical function capacity was most common in lateral elbow tendinopathy. Efficacy reviews - 204 studies provided evidence that exercise therapy is safe and beneficial, and that patients are generally satisfied with treatment outcome and perceive the improvement to be substantial. In the context of generally low and very low-quality evidence, results identified that: (1) the shoulder may benefit more from flexibility (effect sizeResistance:Flexibility = 0.18 [95% CrI 0.07 to 0.29]) and proprioception (effect sizeResistance:Proprioception = 0.16 [95% CrI -1.8 to 0.32]); (2) when performing strengthening exercise it may be most beneficial to combine concentric and eccentric modes (effect sizeEccentricOnly:Concentric+Eccentric = 0.48 [95% CrI -0.13 to 1.1]; and (3) exercise may be most beneficial when combined with another conservative modality (e.g. injection or electro-therapy increasing effect size by ≈0.1 to 0.3). Mixed-method review - 94 studies (11 qualitative) provided evidence that exercise interventions for tendinopathy can largely be considered feasible and acceptable, and that several important factors should be considered when prescribing exercise for tendinopathy, including an awareness of potential barriers to and facilitators of engaging with exercise, patients' and providers' prior experience and beliefs, and the importance of patient education, self-management and the patient-healthcare professional relationship.

Limitations

Despite a large body of literature on exercise for tendinopathy, there are methodological and reporting limitations that influenced the recommendations that could be made.

Conclusion

The findings provide some support for the use of exercise combined with another conservative modality; flexibility and proprioception exercise for the shoulder; and a combination of eccentric and concentric strengthening exercise across tendinopathies. However, the findings must be interpreted within the context of the quality of the available evidence.

Future work

There is an urgent need for high-quality efficacy, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and qualitative research that is adequately reported, using common terminology, definitions and outcomes.

Study registration

This project is registered as DOI: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00175 (scoping review); PROSPERO CRD 42020168187 (efficacy reviews); https://osf.io/preprints/sportrxiv/y7sk6/ (efficacy review 1); https://osf.io/preprints/sportrxiv/eyxgk/ (efficacy review 2); https://osf.io/preprints/sportrxiv/mx5pv/ (efficacy review 3); PROSPERO CRD42020164641 (mixed-method review).

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) HTA programme and will be published in full in HTA Journal; Vol. 27, No. 24. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Exercise for rotator cuff tendinopathy: Proposed mechanisms of recovery

Rotator cuff (RC) tendinopathy is a common recurrent cause of shoulder pain, and resistance exercise is the first-line recommended intervention. Proposed causal mechanisms of resistance exercise for patients with RC tendinopathy consist of four domains: tendon structure, neuromuscular factors, pain and sensorimotor processing, and psychosocial factors. Tendon structure plays a role in RC tendinopathy, with decreased stiffness, increased thickness, and collagen disorganization. Neuromuscular performance deficits of altered kinematics, muscle activation, and force are present in RC tendinopathy, but advanced methods of assessing muscle performance are needed to fully assess these factors. Psychological factors of depression, anxiety, pain catastrophizing, treatment expectations, and self-efficacy are present and predict patient-reported outcomes. Central nervous system dysfunctions also exist, specifically altered pain and sensorimotor processing. Resisted exercise may normalize these factors, but limited evidence exists to explain the relationship of the four proposed domains to trajectory of recovery and defining persistent deficits limiting outcomes. Clinicians and researchers can use this model to understand how exercise mediates change in patient outcomes, develop subgroups to deliver patient-specific approach for treatment and define metrics to track recovery over time. Supporting evidence is limited, indicating the need for future studies characterizing mechanisms of recovery with exercise for RC tendinopathy.

The Effectiveness of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in Patients With Subacromial Impingement Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to compare the effects of exercise training plus neuromuscular electrical stimulation with exercise training alone on shoulder function, pain, range of motion, and muscle strength in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome.

DESIGN

Patients were randomly divided into groups of exercise training ( n = 24) and exercise training + neuromuscular electrical stimulation ( n = 24). Shoulder function was evaluated with the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire, pain level was assessed with a visual analog scale, range of motion was measured with a goniometer, and muscle strength was assessed with a handheld dynamometer baseline and at the end of treatment (week 8).

RESULTS

In both groups, shoulder function, range of motion, and muscle strength (except flexion muscle strength in the exercise training group) increased, while pain decreased ( P < 0.05). Compared with the exercise training group, visual analog scale-activity and visual analog scale-night decreased more, and external-rotation range of motion and whole muscle strength increased more in the exercise training + neuromuscular electrical stimulation group ( P < 0.05). On the other hand, the effect sizes were medium to large for both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of neuromuscular electrical stimulation treatment to exercise training did not improve shoulder function, which is the primary outcome, more than exercise training alone, but increased muscle strength and range of motion (external-rotation only) and decreased pain (activity-night), which are the secondary outcomes.

Comparison of Manual Therapy Technique to Therapeutic Exercise in the Treatment of Patients With Subacromial Impingement Syndrome: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of manual therapy to therapeutic exercise on shoulder pain, disability, and range of motion (ROM) in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome (SAIS).

METHODS

Sixty patients with SAIS were randomly assigned into the manual therapy (MT) and therapeutic exercise (TE) groups. Patients in the MT group were treated with joint mobilization, which was applied to the glenohumeral, acromioclavicular, sternoclavicular and scapulothoracic joints, and trigger point (TrP) inactivation using ischemic compression. Patients in the TE group performed therapeutic exercises. Shoulder pain, disability and active ROM (elevation, external rotation, and internal rotation) were assessed by the visual analog scale, the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, and a goniometer, respectively. The outcomes were measured at baseline, after the intervention, and 1 month after the intervention.

RESULTS

After the treatment, both groups had significant improvements in shoulder pain, disability, and ROM (P < .05). The MT group experienced a greater reduction in shoulder pain than the TE group (P < .001). However, in disability and ROM, both groups exhibited similar improvements in post-treatment and follow-up periods.

CONCLUSION

Both MT and TE were effective in improving shoulder pain, disability, and ROM in patients with SAIS. Greater improvement in shoulder pain was observed in the MT group.

Effectiveness of Glenohumeral Joint Mobilization on Range of Motion and Pain in Patients With Rotator Cuff Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of glenohumeral joint mobilization (JM) on range of motion and pain intensity in patients with rotator cuff (RC) disorders.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed in the MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Embase, PEDro, LILACS, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases. The eligibility criteria for selecting studies included randomized clinical trials that investigated the effect of glenohumeral JM techniques with or without other therapeutic interventions on range of motion, pain intensity, and shoulder function in patients older than 18 years with RC disorders. Two authors independently performed the search, study selection, and data extraction, and assessed risk of bias. Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation ratings were used to evaluate the quality of evidence in this study.

RESULTS

Twenty-four trials met the eligibility criteria, and 15 studies were included in the quantitative synthesis. At 4 to 6 weeks, for glenohumeral JM with other manual therapy techniques vs other treatments, the mean difference (MD) for shoulder flexion was -3.42° (P = .006), abduction 1.54° (P = .76), external rotation 0.65° (P = .85), and Shoulder and Pain Disability Index score 5.19 points (P = .5), and standard MD for pain intensity was 0.16 (P = .5). At 4 to 5 weeks, for the addition of glenohumeral JM to an exercise program vs exercise program alone, the MD for the visual analog scale was 0.13 cm (P = .51) and the Shoulder and Pain Disability Index score was -4.04 points (P = .01).

CONCLUSION

Compared with other treatments or an exercise program alone, the addition of glenohumeral JM with or without other manual therapy techniques does not provide significant clinical benefit with respect to shoulder function, range of motion, or pain intensity in patients with RC disorders. The quality of evidence was very low to high according to Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation ratings.

Dosage of joint mobilisation for the management of rotator cuff-related shoulder pain: protocol for a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Rotator cuff-related shoulder pain is the most common diagnosis of shoulder pain, which ranks as the third most common musculoskeletal disorder. The first-line treatment for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain is physiotherapy, and joint mobilisation is widely used in conjunction with other modalities. The type and dosage of joint mobilisations could influence treatment outcomes for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain, although research evidence is inconclusive.

OBJECTIVES

To (1) systematically search, identify and map the reported type and dosage of joint mobilisations used in previous studies for the management of patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain; and (2) summarise the rationale for adopting a specific joint mobilisation dosage.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will follow the methodological framework outlined by Arksey and O'Malley and report the results as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guideline. Two authors will independently screen and extract data from the six databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and SPORTDiscus, with publication date from their inceptions to 25 August 2021. A third author will be consulted if the two authors disagree about the inclusion of any study in the review. We will summarise the results using descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required for this protocol. Mapping and summarising the reported type and dosage of joint mobilisations for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain from previous studies will provide a foundation for further optimal selection of type and dosage of joint mobilisations for treating patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. The review is part of an ongoing research that focuses on joint mobilisation for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. The results will be disseminated through presentations at academic conferences and a peer-reviewed publication.