Aim To summarise the current evidence regarding the effectiveness of physical therapy on pain, function and range of motion in individuals with subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS). Design Systematic review. Data sources PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, Lilacs, Ibecs and Scielo databases. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating physical therapy modalities for SAPS on pain, function/disability or range of motion were included. Results 64 high-quality RCTs were included. Exercise therapy provided high evidence of being as effective as surgery intervention and better than no treatment or placebo treatment to improve pain, function and range of motion in the short, mid and long terms. The combination of mobilisation and exercises provided high evidence to decrease pain and improve function in the short term. There is limited evidence for improvements on the outcomes with the isolated application of manual therapy. High level of evidence was synthesised regarding the lack of beneficial effects of physical resources such as low-level laser, ultrasound and pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) on pain, function or range of motion in the treatment of SAPS. There is limited evidence for microwave diathermy and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. There is moderate evidence to no benefits with taping in the short term. Effects of diacutaneous fibrolysis and acupuncture are not well established yet. Conclusions Exercise therapy should be the first-line treatment to improve pain, function and range of motion. The addition of mobilisations to exercises may accelerate reduction of pain in the short term. Low-level laser therapy, PEMF and taping should not be recommended.

Study Design: Randomized controlled trial. Objective: To evaluate the effects of an exercise protocol, with and without manual therapy, on scapular kinematics, function, pain, and mechanical sensitivity in individuals with shoulder impingement syndrome. Background: Stretching and strengthening exercises have been shown to effectively decrease pain and disability in individuals with shoulder impingement syndrome. There is still conflicting evidence regarding the efficacy of adding manual therapy to an exercise therapy regimen. Methods: Forty-six patients were assigned to 1 of 2 groups, one of which received a 4-week intervention of stretching and strengthening exercises (exercise alone) and the other the same intervention, supplemented by manual therapy targeting the shoulder and cervical spine (exercise plus manual therapy). All outcomes were measured preintervention and postintervention at 4 weeks. Outcome measures were scapular kinematics in the scapular and sagittal planes during arm elevation, function as determined through the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, pain as assessed with a visual analog scale, and mechanical sensitivity as assessed with pressure pain threshold. Results: Independent of the intervention group, small, clinically irrelevant changes in scapular kinematics were observed postintervention. A significant group-by-time interaction effect (P = .001) was found for scapular anterior tilt during elevation in the sagittal plane, with a 3.0° increase (95% confidence interval [CI]: −1.5°, 7.5°) relative to baseline in the exercise-plus–manual therapy group compared to a decrease of 0.3° (95% CI: −4.2°, 4.8°) in the exercise-alone group. Pain, mechanical sensitivity, and the DASH score improved similarly for both groups by the end of the intervention period. Conclusion: Adding manual therapy to an exercise protocol did not enhance improvements in scapular kinematics, function, and pain in individuals with shoulder impingement syndrome. The noted improvements in pain and function are not likely explained by changes in scapular kinematics. The study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02035618). Level of Evidence: Therapy, level 1b-. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2015;45(12):984–997. Epub 15 Oct 2015. doi:10.2519/jospt.2015.5939

Study Design: Randomized controlled trial with immediate follow-up.Objectives: To evaluate the immediate effects of a low-amplitude, high-velocity thrust thoracic spine manipulation (TSM) on pain and scapular kinematics during elevation and lowering of the arm in individuals with shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS). The secondary objective was to evaluate the immediate effects of TSM on scapular kinematics during elevation and lowering of the arm in individuals without symptoms.Background: Considering the regional interdependence among the shoulder and the thoracic and cervical spines, TSM may improve pain and function in individuals with SIS. Comparing individuals with SIS to those without shoulder pathology may provide information on the effects of TSM specifically in those with SIS.Methods: Fifty subjects (mean ± SD age, 31.8 ± 10.9 years) with SIS and 47 subjects (age, 25.8 ± 5.0 years) asymptomatic for shoulder dysfunction were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 interventions: TSM or a sham intervention. Scapular kinematics were analyzed during elevation and lowering of the arm in the sagittal plane, and a numeric pain rating scale was used to assess shoulder pain during arm movement at preintervention and postintervention.Results: For those in the SIS group, shoulder pain was reduced immediately after TSM and the sham intervention (mean ± SD preintervention, 2.9 ± 2.5; postintervention, 2.3 ± 2.5; P<.01; moderate effect size [Cohen d = 0.2]). Scapular internal rotation increased 0.5° ± 0.02° (P = .04; small effect size [Cohen d<0.1]) during elevation of the arm after TSM and sham intervention in the SIS group only. Subjects with and without SIS who received TSM and asymptomatic subjects who received the sham intervention had a significant increase (1.6° ± 2.7°) in scapular upward rotation postintervention (P<.05; small effect size [Cohen d<0.2]), which was not considered clinically significant. Scapular anterior tilt increased 1.0° ± 4.8° during elevation and lowering of the arm postmanipulation (P<.05; small effect size [Cohen d<0.2]) in the asymptomatic subjects who received TSM.Conclusion: Shoulder pain in individuals with SIS immediately decreased after a TSM. The observed changes in scapular kinematics following TSM were not considered clinically important.Level of Evidence: Therapy, level 4. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2014;44(7):475–487. Epub 22 May 2014. doi:10.2519/jospt.2014.4760

To investigate the effect of a rehabilitation program based on cervical mobilization and exercise on clinical signs and mandibular function in subjects with temporomandibular disorder (TMD). Single-group pre-post test, with baseline comparison. Twelve women (22.08±2.23 years) with myofascial pain and mixed TMD according to the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders. Subjects were evaluated three times: twice before (baseline phase) and once after intervention. Self-reported pain, jaw function [according to the Mandibular Functional Impairment Questionnaire (MFIQ)], pain-free maximum mouth opening (MMO), and pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) of both masseter and temporalis muscles were obtained. Baseline and post-intervention differences were investigated, and effect size was estimated through Cohen's d coefficient. Jaw function improved 7 points on the scale after the intervention (P=0.019), and self-reported pain was significantly reduced (P=0.009). Pain-free MMO varied from 32.3±8.8 mm to 38±8.8 mm and showed significant improvement (P=0.017) with moderate effect size when compared to the baseline phase. PPT also increased with moderate effect size, and subjects had the baseline values changed from 1.23±0.2 kg/cm2 to 1.4±0.2 kg/cm2 in the left masseter (P=0.03), from 1.31±0.28 kg/cm2 to 1.51±0.2 kg/cm2 in the right masseter (P>0.05), from 1.32±0.2 kg/cm2 to 1.46±0.2 kg/cm2 in the left temporalis (P=0.047), and from 1.4±0.2 kg/cm2 to 1.67±0.3 kg/cm2 in the right temporalis (P=0.06). The protocol caused significant changes in pain-free MMO, self-reported pain, and functionality of the stomatognathic system in subjects with myofascial TMD, regardless of joint involvement. Even though these differences are statistically significant, their clinical relevance is still questionable.

Study Design: Clinical measurement. Objective: To establish trial-to-trial within-day and between-day reliability, standard error of measurement, and minimal detectable change of scapular orientation during elevation and lowering of the arm, and with the arm relaxed at the side, in individuals with and without shoulder impingement. Background: Electromagnetic devices are commonly used to measure 3-D scapular kinematics during arm elevation in different conditions and for intervention studies. However, there is a lack of studies that evaluate within- and between-day reliability of these measurements. Methods: The subjects were allocated to either a control group or an impingement group. Kinematic data were collected using the Flock of Birds electromagnetic device during elevation and lowering of the arm in the sagittal plane on 2 different occasions, separated by 3 to 5 days. Forty-nine subjects were tested for within-day reliability. Forty-three subjects were reassessed for between-day reliability. Results: Intraclass correlation coefficients for within- and between-day assessment of scapular orientation during elevation and lowering of the arm in both groups ranged from 0.92 to 0.99 and from 0.54 to 0.88, respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficients for assessment of scapular orientation with the arms relaxed at the side in both groups ranged from 0.66 to 0.95. The standard error of measurement for between-day measurements ranged from 3.37° to 7.44° for both groups. The minimal detectable change for between-day measurements increased from 7.81° at the lower to 17.27° at the higher humerothoracic elevation angles. Conclusion: These results support the use of Flock of Birds to measure scapular orientations in subjects with and without impingement symptoms. The measurements showed excellent within-day reliability but were not highly reliable over time. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2014;44(5):341–349. Epub 27 March 2014. doi:10.2519/jospt.2014.4705