Journal of sport rehabilitation · 2014
The effects of scapular mobilization in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное 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.
Aytar Aydan, Baltaci Gul, Uhl Tim L, Tuzun Handan, Oztop Pinar, Karatas Metin
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of scapular mobilization on function, pain, range of motion, and satisfaction in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome (SAIS).
DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.
SETTING: University hospital clinics in Turkey.
PARTICIPANTS: 66 participants (mean ± SD age 52.06 ± 3.71 y) with SAIS.
INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized into 3 groups: scapular mobilization, sham scapular mobilization, and supervised exercise. Before the interventions transcutaneous electrical stimulation and hot pack were applied to all groups. Total intervention duration for all groups was 3 wk with a total of 9 treatment sessions.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Shoulder function and pain intensity were primary outcome measures; range of motion and participant satisfaction were secondary outcome measures. Shoulder function was assessed with the short form of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (DASH). A visual analog scale was used to evaluate pain severity. Active range of motion was measured with a universal goniometer. A 7-point Likert scale was used to evaluate satisfaction. Outcome measurements were performed at baseline, before visits 5 and 10, 4 wk after visit 9, and 8 wk after visit 9.
RESULTS: There was no group difference for DASH score (P = .75), pain at rest (P = .41), pain with activity (P = .45), pain at night (P = .74), and shoulder flexion (P = .65), external rotation (P = .63), and internal rotation (P = .19). There was a significant increase in shoulder motion and function and a significant decrease in pain across time when all groups were combined (P < .001). The level of satisfaction was not significantly different for any of the questions about participant satisfaction between all groups (P > .05).
CONCLUSION: There was not a significant advantage of scapular mobilization for shoulder function, pain, range of motion, and satisfaction compared with sham or supervised-exercise groups in patients with SAIS.
DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.
SETTING: University hospital clinics in Turkey.
PARTICIPANTS: 66 participants (mean ± SD age 52.06 ± 3.71 y) with SAIS.
INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized into 3 groups: scapular mobilization, sham scapular mobilization, and supervised exercise. Before the interventions transcutaneous electrical stimulation and hot pack were applied to all groups. Total intervention duration for all groups was 3 wk with a total of 9 treatment sessions.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Shoulder function and pain intensity were primary outcome measures; range of motion and participant satisfaction were secondary outcome measures. Shoulder function was assessed with the short form of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (DASH). A visual analog scale was used to evaluate pain severity. Active range of motion was measured with a universal goniometer. A 7-point Likert scale was used to evaluate satisfaction. Outcome measurements were performed at baseline, before visits 5 and 10, 4 wk after visit 9, and 8 wk after visit 9.
RESULTS: There was no group difference for DASH score (P = .75), pain at rest (P = .41), pain with activity (P = .45), pain at night (P = .74), and shoulder flexion (P = .65), external rotation (P = .63), and internal rotation (P = .19). There was a significant increase in shoulder motion and function and a significant decrease in pain across time when all groups were combined (P < .001). The level of satisfaction was not significantly different for any of the questions about participant satisfaction between all groups (P > .05).
CONCLUSION: There was not a significant advantage of scapular mobilization for shoulder function, pain, range of motion, and satisfaction compared with sham or supervised-exercise groups in patients with SAIS.