Effectiveness of Adding a Large Dose of Shoulder Strengthening to Current Nonoperative Care for Subacromial Impingement:A Pragmatic, Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial (SExSI Trial)

BACKGROUND: A strong recommendation against subacromial decompression surgery was issued in 2019. This leaves nonoperative care as the only treatment option, but recent studies suggest that the dose of strengthening exercise is not sufficient in current nonoperative care. At this point, it is unknown if adding more strengthening to current nonoperative care is of clinical value. PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness of adding a large dose of shoulder strengthening to current nonoperative care for subacromial impingement compared with usual care alone. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: In this double-blinded, pragmatic randomized controlled trial, we randomly allocated 200 consecutive patients referred to orthopaedic shoulder specialist care for long-standing shoulder pain (>3 months), aged 18 to 65 years and diagnosed with subacromial impingement using validated criteria, to the intervention group (IG) or control group (CG). Outcome assessors were blinded, and participants were blinded to the study hypothesis as well as to the treatment method in the other group. The CG received usual nonoperative care; the IG underwent the same plus an add-on intervention designed to at least double the total dose of shoulder strengthening. The primary outcome was the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI; 0-100) at 4-month follow-up, with 10 points defined as the minimal clinically important difference. Secondary outcomes included shoulder strength, range of motion, health-related quality of life, and the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS). RESULTS: Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses showed no significant or clinically relevant between-group differences for any outcome. From baseline to 4-month follow-up, SPADI scores improved in both groups (intention-to-treat analysis; IG, –22.1 points; CG, –22.7 points; between-group mean difference, 0.6 points [95% CI, –5.5 to 6.6]). At 4 months after randomization, only 54% of the IG and 48% of the CG (P = .4127) reached the PASS. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Adding a large dose of shoulder strengthening to current nonoperative care for patients with subacromial impingement did not result in superior shoulder-specific patient-reported outcomes. Moreover, approximately half of all randomized patients did not achieve the PASS after 4 months of nonoperative care, leaving many of these patients with unacceptable symptoms. This study showed that adding more exercise is not a viable solution to this problem. REGISTRATION: NCT02747251 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

Maximal and Explosive Muscle Strength During Hip Adduction Squeeze and Hip Abduction Press Test Using A Handheld Dynamometer: An Intra- and Inter-tester Reliability Study

# Background Hip adduction and abduction muscle function plays an important role for risk of groin pain in athletes. Maximal isometric strength can be obtained clinically using a handheld dynamometer. However, in very strong athletes this is challenging, as external fixation of the dynamometer is needed for reliable measures. An alternative to unilateral testing, is the long-lever hip adduction squeeze test and a novel bilateral hip abduction press test. While promising intra-tester reliability has been found for maximal strength during the long-lever hip adduction squeeze test, inter-tester reliability may be more challenging during both maximal and explosive strength measurements. # Hypothesis/purpose The aim of the present study was to assess intra- and inter-tester reliability of maximal, and explosive strength during the long lever hip adduction squeeze test and the long lever hip abduction press test in healthy adults using a hand-held dynamometer. # Study design Intra- and interrater reliability study. # Methods Forty-nine healthy subjects were included for intra- (n=20) and inter-tester reliability (n=29). Subjects performed the hip adduction long lever squeeze test and the bilateral hip abduction press test in a randomized order. Maximal isometric strength and early (0-100 ms) and late (0-200 ms) phase rate of force development (explosive muscle strength) was obtained using a hand-held dynamometer. Relative reliability for all tests was assessed using ICC~2,1~ two-way mixed model with absolute agreement, thereby taking bias between testers into account. # Results Maximal isometric strength showed good intra- and inter-tester reliability for adduction (ICC: 0.93-0.97) and abduction (ICC: 0.88-0.92). For 0-200 ms rate of force development, both the squeeze and press test showed good intra-tester reliability (ICC: 0.85-0.87), whereas inter-tester reliability was good for hip adduction squeeze (ICC: 0.75) and moderate for hip abduction press (ICC: 0.71). For 0-100 ms rate of force development, the hip abduction press test showed good intra-tester reliability (ICC: 0.78). Remaining tests for intra- and inter-tester reliability showed moderate reliability (ICC: 0.50-0.71). # Conclusion Assessment of maximal isometric strength in hip adduction squeeze and abduction press test showed good intra- and inter-tester reliability, whereas only 0-200 ms rate of force development demonstrated good intra-tester reliability of both tests. Therefore, rate of force development should preferably be conducted by the same tester, while the long lever squeeze and press test can reliably be used within- and between testers to measure maximal isometric strength. # Level of Evidence 3 ©The Author(s