Startseite Effects of Adding Cervicothoracic Treatments to Shoulder Mobilization in Subacromial Impingement Syndrome
Artikel Open Access

Effects of Adding Cervicothoracic Treatments to Shoulder Mobilization in Subacromial Impingement Syndrome

  • Eric Z. Cam und Michael A. Seffinger
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 1. Juli 2018

Wright AA, Donaldson M, Wassinger CA, Emerson-Kavchak. Subacute effects of cervicothoracic spinal thrust/non-thrust in addition to shoulder manual therapy plus exercise intervention in individuals with subacromial impingement syndrome: a prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial pilot study. J Man Manip Ther. 2016;25(4):190-200. doi:10.1080/10669817.2016.1251377

Shoulder pain is a common reason for musculoskeletal office visits in the United States, with a yearly prevalence greater than 50% in the general population.1 The department of physical therapy at High Point University in North Carolina published a pilot randomized controlled trial to determine the subacute effects of cervicothoracic spinal thrust/nonthrust in addition to shoulder nonthrust plus exercise in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome.

Participants were selected from a population of patients who received care at a physiotherapy outpatient or academic physiotherapy setting. Patients were included if they met at least 2 of the following 3 criteria: (1) Hawkins-Kennedy impingement sign; (2) painful arc sign; and (3) weakness in external rotation of the arm at the side. Patients with previous shoulder surgery, fractures, current steroid use, analgesic injection in the past 3 months, cervicothoracic joint referral, neurologic symptoms, sinister pathology, or misdiagnosed shoulder pathology were excluded.

Eighteen patients (9 men, 9 women; mean [SD] age, 43.5 [15.8] years) were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups: 10 to shoulder treatment plus cervicothoracic spinal thrust/nonthrust (CT) and 8 to shoulder treatment only (SO). The physical therapists participated in consensus training for assessing range of motion and standardizing manual therapy. The therapists individualized each treatment to the findings on physical examination to simulate a patient encounter. The SO group received shoulder mobilization techniques (eg, shoulder glide techniques, capsule mobilization, scapulothoracic joint mobilization). The CT group received the shoulder mobilization techniques and cervicothoracic techniques (eg, distraction manipulation, supine thrust manipulation, thoracic thrust manipulation).

The addition of cervicothoracic spinal thrust/nonthrust to shoulder treatment did not significantly change outcomes in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome. Both groups showed statistically significant mean (95% CI) improvement on both the numeric pain rating scale (SO group: −2.50 [−4.00, −1.00]; CT group: −3.50 [−5.25, −1.75]) and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SO group: −38.85 [−61.32, −16.37]; CT group: −36.00 [−52.01, −19.99]). No adverse events occurred.

Of note, a true control, which would have provided a baseline to compare the effectiveness of each treatment plan, was not used in this study. Another limitation of this study was the low number of patients, which could be addressed by expanding inclusion criteria, as patients with contributing factors, such as cervical spine symptoms, were excluded. The types of injuries present in each experimental group can also confound the data; in this study, 50% of the SO group and 70% of the CT group had a chronic shoulder injury. The osteopathic manipulative treatment approach to shoulder pain is similar to the CT approach provided in the experimental group by treating the shoulder and adjacent regions. Similar research should be conducted to assess the effectiveness of the osteopathic approach vs shoulder mobilization only.


Western University of Health Sciences College of Osteopathic Medicine of the Pacific, Pomona, California

References

1. van der Heijden GJ . Shoulder disorders: a state-of-the-art review. Baillieres Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 1999;13(2):287-309.10.1053/berh.1999.0021Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2018-07-01
Published in Print: 2018-07-01

© 2018 American Osteopathic Association

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
  2. Response
  3. OMT MINUTE
  4. Osteopathic Lymphatic Pump Techniques
  5. STILL RELEVANT?
  6. The Rule of the Artery Is Supreme. Or, Is It?
  7. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
  8. Progressive Infantile Scoliosis Managed With Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment
  9. AOA COMMUNICATION (REPRINT)
  10. Official Call: 2018 Annual Business Meeting of the American Osteopathic Association
  11. Proposed Amendments to the AOA Constitution, Bylaws, and Code of Ethics
  12. ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION
  13. Medical Students’ Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors With Regard to Skin Cancer and Sun-Protective Behaviors
  14. Lymphatic Pump Treatment Mobilizes Bioactive Lymph That Suppresses Macrophage Activity In Vitro
  15. JAOA/AACOM MEDICAL EDUCATION
  16. Oral Health Training in Osteopathic Medical Schools: Results of a National Survey
  17. CASE REPORT
  18. Perplexing Rash: Challenges to Diagnosis and Management of Mycosis Fungoides
  19. Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Band Erosion Into the Stomach and Colon
  20. THE SOMATIC CONNECTION
  21. Safety of Chiropractic Manipulation in Patients With Migraines
  22. Effect of HVLA on Chronic Neck Pain and Dysfunction
  23. Effects of Adding Cervicothoracic Treatments to Shoulder Mobilization in Subacromial Impingement Syndrome
  24. Manipulation Under Anesthesia Thaws Frozen Shoulder
  25. Treating Patients With Low Back Pain: Evidence vs Practice
  26. Reducing Low Back and Posterior Pelvic Pain During and After Pregnancy Using OMT
  27. Neuromuscular Manipulation Improves Pain Intensity and Duration in Primary Dysmenorrhea
  28. Reducing Cesarean Delivery Rates and Length of Labor by Addressing Pelvic Shape
  29. Remote MFR Increases Hamstring Flexibility: Support for the Fascial Train Theory
  30. CLINICAL IMAGES
  31. Minocycline-Induced Hyperpigmentation
  32. Massively Enlarged Leiomyomatous Uterus
Heruntergeladen am 22.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.7556/jaoa.2018.105/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen