Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAuthorOlguín-Huerta, Cristian.
dc.contributor.authorAuthorAraya-Quintanilla, Felipe.
dc.contributor.authorAuthorMoncada-Ramírez, Victoria.
dc.contributor.authorAuthorEstrella-Flores, Evelin.
dc.contributor.authorAuthorCuyul-Vásquez, Iván.
dc.contributor.authorAuthorGutiérrez-Espinoza, Héctor.
dc.date.accessionedDate Accessioned2024-09-03T19:20:33Z
dc.date.availableDate Available2024-09-03T19:20:33Z
dc.date.issuedDate Issued2023
dc.identifier.citationReferencia BibliográficaMedicine (United States), 102(22), 9 p.
dc.identifier.issnISSN0025-7974
dc.identifier.uriURIhttp://repositorio.udla.cl/xmlui/handle/udla/1514
dc.identifier.uriURIhttps://journals.lww.com/md-journal/pages/currenttoc.aspx
dc.description.abstractAbstractBackground: The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of scapular mobilization on range of motion, shoulder disability, and pain intensity in patients with primary adhesive capsulitis (AC). Methods: An electronic search was performed in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, CENTRAL, LILACS, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science databases up to March 2023. The eligibility criteria for selected studies included randomized clinical trials that included scapular mobilization with or without other therapeutic interventions for range of motion, shoulder disability, and pain intensity in patients older than 18 years with primary AC. Two authors independently performed the search, study selection, and data extraction, and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Results: Six randomized clinical trials met the eligibility criteria. For scapular mobilization versus other therapeutic interventions, there was no significant difference in the effect sizes between groups: the standard mean difference was -0.16 (95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.87 to 0.56; P =.66) for external rotation, -1.01 (95% CI = -2.33 to 0.31; P =.13) for flexion, -0.29 (95% CI = -1.17 to 0.60; P =.52) for shoulder disability, and 0.65 (95% CI = -0.42 to 1.72; P =.23) for pain intensity. Conclusions: Scapular mobilization with or without other therapeutic interventions does not provide a significant clinical benefit regarding active shoulder range of motion, disability, or pain intensity in patients with primary AC, compared with other manual therapy techniques or other treatments; the quality of evidence was very low to moderate according to the grading of recommendation, assessment, development and evaluation approach.
dc.format.extentdc.format.extent9 páginas
dc.format.extentdc.format.extent869.4Kb
dc.format.mimetypedc.format.mimetypePDF
dc.language.isoLanguage ISOeng
dc.publisherPublisherLippincott Williams and Wilkins
dc.rightsRightsCreative Commons Non Commercial (CC BY-NC)
dc.sourceSourcesMedicine (United States)
dc.subjectSubjectAdhesive capsulitis
dc.subjectSubjectFrozen shoulder
dc.subjectSubjectMusculoskeletal manipulations
dc.subjectSubjectRange of motion
dc.subjectSubjectScapular mobilization
dc.subject.lcshdc.subject.lcshMeta-análisis
dc.titleTitleEffectiveness of scapular mobilization in patients with primary adhesive capsulitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
dc.typeDocument TypeArtículo
dc.udla.catalogadordc.udla.catalogadorCBM
dc.udla.indexdc.udla.indexWoS
dc.udla.indexdc.udla.indexScience Citation Index Expanded
dc.udla.indexdc.udla.indexScopus
dc.udla.indexdc.udla.indexDOAJ
dc.udla.indexdc.udla.indexEMBASE
dc.udla.indexdc.udla.indexMEDLINE
dc.identifier.doidc.identifier.doi10.1097/MD.0000000000033929
dc.facultaddc.facultadFacultad de Salud y Ciencias Sociales


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record