Hydrodilatation, corticosteroids and adhesive capsulitis: A randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hydrodilatation of the glenohumeral joint is by several authors reported to improve shoulder pain and range of motion for patients with adhesive capsulitis. Procedures described often involve the injection of corticosteroids, to which the reported treatment effects may be attributed. Any important contribution arising from the hydrodilatation procedure itself remains to be demonstrated.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In this randomized trial, a hydrodilatation procedure including corticosteroids was compared with the injection of corticosteroids without dilatation. Patients were given three injections with two-week intervals, and all injections were given under fluoroscopic guidance. Outcome measures were the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and measures of active and passive range of motion. Seventy-six patients were included and groups were compared six weeks after treatment. The study was designed as an open trial.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The groups showed a rather similar degree of improvement from baseline. According to a multiple regression analysis, the effect of dilatation was a mean improvement of 3 points (confidence interval: -5 to 11) on the SPADI 0–100 scale. T-tests did not demonstrate any significant between-group differences in range of motion.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study did not identify any important treatment effects resulting from three hydrodilatations that included steroid compared with three steroid injections alone.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>The study is registered in Current Controlled Trials with the registration number ISRCTN90567697.</p

Diagnosis and management of adhesive capsulitis

Adhesive capsulitis is a musculoskeletal condition that has a disabling capability. This review discusses the diagnosis and both operative and nonoperative management of this shoulder condition that causes significant morbidity. Issues related to medications, rehabilitation, and post surgical considerations are discussed

Effectiveness of manual therapies: the UK evidence report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The purpose of this report is to provide a succinct but comprehensive summary of the scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of manual treatment for the management of a variety of musculoskeletal and non-musculoskeletal conditions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The conclusions are based on the results of systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), widely accepted and primarily UK and United States evidence-based clinical guidelines, plus the results of all RCTs not yet included in the first three categories. The strength/quality of the evidence regarding effectiveness was based on an adapted version of the grading system developed by the US Preventive Services Task Force and a study risk of bias assessment tool for the recent RCTs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>By September 2009, 26 categories of conditions were located containing RCT evidence for the use of manual therapy: 13 musculoskeletal conditions, four types of chronic headache and nine non-musculoskeletal conditions. We identified 49 recent relevant systematic reviews and 16 evidence-based clinical guidelines plus an additional 46 RCTs not yet included in systematic reviews and guidelines.</p> <p>Additionally, brief references are made to other effective non-pharmacological, non-invasive physical treatments.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Spinal manipulation/mobilization is effective in adults for: acute, subacute, and chronic low back pain; migraine and cervicogenic headache; cervicogenic dizziness; manipulation/mobilization is effective for several extremity joint conditions; and thoracic manipulation/mobilization is effective for acute/subacute neck pain. The evidence is inconclusive for cervical manipulation/mobilization alone for neck pain of any duration, and for manipulation/mobilization for mid back pain, sciatica, tension-type headache, coccydynia, temporomandibular joint disorders, fibromyalgia, premenstrual syndrome, and pneumonia in older adults. Spinal manipulation is not effective for asthma and dysmenorrhea when compared to sham manipulation, or for Stage 1 hypertension when added to an antihypertensive diet. In children, the evidence is inconclusive regarding the effectiveness for otitis media and enuresis, and it is not effective for infantile colic and asthma when compared to sham manipulation.</p> <p>Massage is effective in adults for chronic low back pain and chronic neck pain. The evidence is inconclusive for knee osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, myofascial pain syndrome, migraine headache, and premenstrual syndrome. In children, the evidence is inconclusive for asthma and infantile colic.</p

Arthroscopic capsular release for idiopathic frozen shoulder with intra-articular injection and a controlled manipulation

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this prospective study was to assess the immediate and long-term effectiveness of arthroscopic capsular release in a large cohort of patients with a precise and isolated diagnosis of stage II idiopathic frozen shoulder. METHODS: All patients underwent a preoperative evaluation. Patients with secondary frozen shoulder and those with concurrent pathology at arthroscopy were excluded. This left 136 patients with a stage II arthroscopically confirmed idiopathic frozen shoulder. At each postoperative attendance, a record was made of pain, function and range of motion. At 12 months, the Oxford shoulder score was calculated, and pain and range of motion were assessed. RESULTS: Fifty per cent achieved good pain relief within a week and eighty per cent within six weeks of arthroscopic capsular release. The mean preoperative visual analogue scale pain score was 6.6 and the mean postoperative score was 1.0. The mean time to achieving good pain relief was 16 days following surgery. No patient could sleep through the night prior to surgery while 90% reported having a complete night's sleep at a mean of 12 days after surgery. The mean postoperative Oxford shoulder score was 38/48 and the mean improvement was 19.2. CONCLUSIONS: This large series demonstrates that arthroscopic capsular release is a safe procedure, with rapid improvement in pain and a marked improvement in range of motion.This article is available via Open Access. Please click on the 'Additional Link' above to access the full-text