ORIGINAL RESEARCH| VOLUME 103, ISSUE 8, P1533-1543,ch AUGUST 01, 2022
Donald J. Hunter, M Ost
Published: March 21, 2022
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2022.03.003
Abstract
Objective
To investigate whether muscle energy technique (MET) to the thoracic spine decreases the pain and disability associated with shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS).
Design
Single-center, 3-arm, randomized controlled trial, single-blind, placebo control with concealed allocation and a 12-month follow-up.
Setting
Private osteopathic practice.
Participants
Three groups of 25 participants (N=75) 40 years or older with SIS received allocated intervention once a week for 15 minutes, 4 consecutive weeks.
Interventions
Participants were randomly allocated to MET to the thoracic spine (MET-only), MET plus soft tissue massage (MET+STM), or placebo.
Main Outcome Measures
Primary outcome measure: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Secondary outcome measures: Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) questionnaire; visual analog scale (VAS) (mm/100): current, 7-day average, and 4-week average; Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS); and Global Rating of Change (GROC). Measures recorded at baseline, discharge, 4-week follow-up, 6 months, and 12 months. Also baseline and discharge thoracic posture and range of motion (ROM) measured using an inclinometer. Statistical analysis included mixed-effects linear regression model for DASH, SPADI, VAS, PSFS, GROC, and thoracic posture and ROM.
Results
MET-only group demonstrated significantly greater improvement in pain and disability (DASH, SPADI, VAS 7-day average) than placebo at discharge (mean difference, DASH=−8.4; 95% CI, −14.0 to −2.8; SPADI=−14.7; 95% CI, −23.0 to −6.3; VAS=−15.5; 95% CI, −24.5 to −6.5), 6 months (−11.1; 95% CI, −18.6 to −3.7; −14.9; 95% CI, −26.3 to −3.5; −14.1; 95% CI, −26.0 to −2.2), and 12 months (−13.4; 95% CI, −23.9 to−2.9; −19.0; 95% CI, −32.4 to −5.7; −17.3; 95% CI, −30.9 to −3.8). MET+STM group also demonstrated greater improvement in disability but not pain compared with placebo at discharge (DASH=−8.2; 95% CI, −14.0 to −2.3; SPADI=−13.5; 95% CI, −22.3 to −4.8) and 6 months (−9.0; 95% CI, −16.9 to −1.2; −12.4; 95% CI, −24.3 to −0.5). For the PSFS, MET-only group improved compared with placebo at discharge (1.3; 95% CI, 0.1-2.5) and 12 months (1.8; 95% CI, 0.5-3.2); MET+STM at 12 months (1.7; 95% CI, 0.3-3.0). GROC: MET-only group improved compared with placebo at discharge (1.5; 95% CI, 0.9-2.2) and 4 weeks (1.0; 95% CI, 0.1-1.9); MET+STM at discharge (1.2; 95% CI, 0.5-1.9) and 6 months (1.2; 95% CI, 0.1-1.3). There were no differences between MET-only group and MET+STM, and no between-group differences in thoracic posture or ROM.
Conclusions
MET of the thoracic spine with or without STM improved the pain and disability in individuals 40 years or older with SIS and may be recommended as a treatment approach for SIS.