Physiotherapy · 2013
Efficacy of a static progressive stretch device as an adjunct to physical therapy in treating adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder: a prospective, randomised study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ibrahim M, Donatelli R, Hellman M, Echternach J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Stress relaxation and static progressive stretch are techniques used for non-surgical restoration of shoulder range of motion for patients with adhesive capsulitis.
OBJECTIVES: To compare a static progressive stretch device plus traditional therapy with traditional therapy alone for the treatment of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder.
DESIGN: Prospective, randomised controlled trial.
PARTICIPANTS: Sixty patients with adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder were assigned at random to an experimental group or a control group.
INTERVENTIONS: Both groups received three traditional therapy sessions per week for 4 weeks. In addition, the experimental group used a static progressive stretch device for 4 weeks.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was shoulder range of motion (active and passive shoulder abduction, and passive shoulder external rotation). The secondary outcome measures were function [measured by the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire] and pain [measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS)].
RESULTS: At baseline, there were no differences between the two groups. However, after the intervention, there were significant (P<0.05) differences between the groups for all outcome parameters: 0.3 for mean VAS scores [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.6 to 1.1], -10.1 for DASH scores (95% CI -21.0 to 0.9), 21.2° for shoulder passive external rotation (95% CI 16.8 to 25.7), 26.4° for shoulder passive abduction (95% CI 17.4 to 35.3), and 27.7° for shoulder active abduction (95% CI 20.3 to 35.0). At 12-month follow-up, the differences between the groups were maintained and even increased for mean shoulder range of motion, VAS scores and DASH scores, with significant differences (P<0.001) between the groups: -2.0 for VAS scores (95% CI -2.9 to -1.2), -53.8 for DASH scores (95% CI -64.7 to -42.9), 47.9° for shoulder passive external rotation (95% CI 43.5 to 52.3), 44.9° for shoulder passive abduction (95% CI 36.0 to 53.8), and 94.3° for shoulder active abduction (95% CI 87.0 to 101.7).
CONCLUSION: Use of a static progressive stretch device in combination with traditional therapy appears to have beneficial long-term effects on shoulder range of motion, pain and functional outcomes in patients with adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. At 12-month follow-up, the experimental group had continued to improve, while the control group had relapsed.
OBJECTIVES: To compare a static progressive stretch device plus traditional therapy with traditional therapy alone for the treatment of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder.
DESIGN: Prospective, randomised controlled trial.
PARTICIPANTS: Sixty patients with adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder were assigned at random to an experimental group or a control group.
INTERVENTIONS: Both groups received three traditional therapy sessions per week for 4 weeks. In addition, the experimental group used a static progressive stretch device for 4 weeks.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was shoulder range of motion (active and passive shoulder abduction, and passive shoulder external rotation). The secondary outcome measures were function [measured by the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire] and pain [measured using a visual analogue scale (VAS)].
RESULTS: At baseline, there were no differences between the two groups. However, after the intervention, there were significant (P<0.05) differences between the groups for all outcome parameters: 0.3 for mean VAS scores [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.6 to 1.1], -10.1 for DASH scores (95% CI -21.0 to 0.9), 21.2° for shoulder passive external rotation (95% CI 16.8 to 25.7), 26.4° for shoulder passive abduction (95% CI 17.4 to 35.3), and 27.7° for shoulder active abduction (95% CI 20.3 to 35.0). At 12-month follow-up, the differences between the groups were maintained and even increased for mean shoulder range of motion, VAS scores and DASH scores, with significant differences (P<0.001) between the groups: -2.0 for VAS scores (95% CI -2.9 to -1.2), -53.8 for DASH scores (95% CI -64.7 to -42.9), 47.9° for shoulder passive external rotation (95% CI 43.5 to 52.3), 44.9° for shoulder passive abduction (95% CI 36.0 to 53.8), and 94.3° for shoulder active abduction (95% CI 87.0 to 101.7).
CONCLUSION: Use of a static progressive stretch device in combination with traditional therapy appears to have beneficial long-term effects on shoulder range of motion, pain and functional outcomes in patients with adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. At 12-month follow-up, the experimental group had continued to improve, while the control group had relapsed.