Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Comparative Study on the effectiveness of Maitland Mobilization Technique Versus Muscle Energy Technique in Treatment of Shoulder Adhesive Capsulitis


Affiliations
1 Department of Physiotherapy, Indore Institute of Medical Sciences Bhandari Hospital & Research Centre, Indore (M.P.), India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Objective: Different treatment approaches have been advocated for adhesive capsulitis, but there is not much scientific evidence to support the standard treatment. The purpose of this study is to establish best and efficient protocol for treatment of idiopathic adhesive capsulitis.

Method and subjects: 30 subjects including both sexes between 40-60 years, Diagnosed adhesive capsulitis were selected and with lottery random sampling method were assigned in two groups (A or B) with 15 subjects each. Group A received moist pack for 15 minutes, active ROM exercises and Maitland mobilization. Group B received moist pack for 15 minutes, active ROM exercises and Muscle Energy Technique (MET). Both the groups were treated 6 times a week for 2 weeks and were told to continue the exercises at home. All the subjects were measured for pain by VAS, for all shoulder movements by goniometer on first day before starting treatment and on 15th day after treatment.

Result: There was significant improvement from pre-treatment levels in pain and ROM in both groups. Although the ROM improvement was seen more in Maitland mobilization group and reduction in pain was seen more in MET group.

Conclusion: MET is more effective in reducing pain so when pain of an acute or chronic nature, makes controlled contraction of involved muscles difficult, the therapeutic use of the antagonists by MET can patently be of value and as soon the pain subsides Maitland mobilization can be incorporated to increase ROM.


Keywords

Adhesive Capsulitis, Maitland mobilization, MET (Muscle Energy Technique)
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Neviaser TJ. Adhesive capsulitis. Orthop Clin North Am. 1987; 18:439– 443.
  • Neviaser RJ, Neviaser TJ. The frozen shoulder: diagnosis and management. Clin Orthop. 1987; 223:59– 64.
  • Vermeulen HM, Obermann WR, Burger BJ, et al. End-range mobilization techniques in adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder joint: a multiple-subject case report. Phys Ther. 2000; 80:1204–1213.
  • Reeves B. The natural history of the frozen shoulder syndrome. Scand J Rheumatol. 1975; 4:193–196.
  • Grubbs N. Frozen shoulder syndrome: a review of literature. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1993; 18:479–487.
  • Rizk TE, Pinals RS. Frozen shoulder. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 1982; 11:440–452.
  • Murnaghan JP. Frozen shoulder. In: Rockwood CA, Matsen FA, eds. The Shoulder. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 1990:837– 862.
  • Grey RG. The natural history of “idiopathic” frozen shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1978; 60:564.
  • Vecchio PC, Kavanagh RT, Hazleman BL, King RH. Community survey of shoulder disorders in the elderly to assess the natural history and effects of treatment. Ann Rheum Dis. 1995; 54:152–154.
  • Cyriax J. Textbook of Orthopedic Medicine, Vol. 1: Diagnosis of Soft Tissue Lesions. 7th Ed. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Co; 1978.
  • Mao C, Jaw W, Cheng H. Frozen shoulder: correlation between the response to physical therapy and follow-up shoulder arthrography. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78:857–859.
  • Vermeulen HM, Rozing PM, Obermann WR, et al. Comparison of high-grade and low-grade mobilization techniques in the management of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder: randomized controlled trial. Phys Ther. 2006; 86:355–368.
  • Vermeulen HM, Stokdijk M, Eilers PH, et al. Measurement of three dimensional shoulder movement patterns with an electromagnetic tracking device in patients with a frozen shoulder. Ann Rheum Dis. 2002; 61:115–120.
  • Griggs SM, Ahn A, Green A. Idiopathic adhesive capsulitis: a prospective functional outcome study of nonoperative treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000; 82:1398–1407.
  • Buchbinder R, Hoving JL, Green S, et al. Short course prednisolone for adhesive capsulitis (frozen shoulder or stiff painful shoulder): a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004; 63:1460–1469.
  • Moore SD, Laudner KG, McLoda TA, Shaffer MA. A Randomized Controlled Trial of the Immediate Effects of Muscle Energy Techniques on Posterior Shoulder Tightness. Therapy, level 1b. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther, Epub 6 April 2011. doi:10.2519/ jospt.2011.3292.
  • Poonam Rani, Neeti Mishra. Comparative study of the clinical outcome of Maitland and conservative treatment in idiopathic adhesive capsulitis “Sport Medicine Journal” No. 22 - 2010.
  • Maitland GD: Peripheral manipulation. Ed. 3. Butterworth-Heinemann. Boston, 1991.
  • Goodridge, J.P.: “Muscle energy technique: definition, explanation, methods of procedure,” JAOA, Dec 1981, 81(4): 249- 253.
  • Moritz U: Evaluation of manipulation and other manual therapy. Scand J Rehabil Med 11:173-179, 1979.
  • Nicholson GG. The effect of passive joint mobilization on pain and hypomobility associated with adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1985; 6:238– 246.
  • Kisner C, Colby LA: Therapeutic Exercise – Foundations and Techniques 4th Ed.
  • Kaltenborn FM. Manual Therapy for the Extremity Joints. Oslo, Norway: Olaf Norlis Bokhandel, 1976.
  • Ward, Robert C. et al.; Foundations for Osteopathic Medicine (2nd Ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
  • Steven J. Kargeane: Principles of Manual Sports Medicine. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2005.
  • Lisi, Anthony J: Muscle energy techniques in chiropractic practice. Journal of the American Chiropractic Association, Oct 2002.

Abstract Views: 3391

PDF Views: 2




  • Comparative Study on the effectiveness of Maitland Mobilization Technique Versus Muscle Energy Technique in Treatment of Shoulder Adhesive Capsulitis

Abstract Views: 3391  |  PDF Views: 2

Authors

Shah Atika Suri
Department of Physiotherapy, Indore Institute of Medical Sciences Bhandari Hospital & Research Centre, Indore (M.P.), India
Misra Anand
Department of Physiotherapy, Indore Institute of Medical Sciences Bhandari Hospital & Research Centre, Indore (M.P.), India

Abstract


Objective: Different treatment approaches have been advocated for adhesive capsulitis, but there is not much scientific evidence to support the standard treatment. The purpose of this study is to establish best and efficient protocol for treatment of idiopathic adhesive capsulitis.

Method and subjects: 30 subjects including both sexes between 40-60 years, Diagnosed adhesive capsulitis were selected and with lottery random sampling method were assigned in two groups (A or B) with 15 subjects each. Group A received moist pack for 15 minutes, active ROM exercises and Maitland mobilization. Group B received moist pack for 15 minutes, active ROM exercises and Muscle Energy Technique (MET). Both the groups were treated 6 times a week for 2 weeks and were told to continue the exercises at home. All the subjects were measured for pain by VAS, for all shoulder movements by goniometer on first day before starting treatment and on 15th day after treatment.

Result: There was significant improvement from pre-treatment levels in pain and ROM in both groups. Although the ROM improvement was seen more in Maitland mobilization group and reduction in pain was seen more in MET group.

Conclusion: MET is more effective in reducing pain so when pain of an acute or chronic nature, makes controlled contraction of involved muscles difficult, the therapeutic use of the antagonists by MET can patently be of value and as soon the pain subsides Maitland mobilization can be incorporated to increase ROM.


Keywords


Adhesive Capsulitis, Maitland mobilization, MET (Muscle Energy Technique)

References