We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
The Addition of Glenohumeral Adductor Coactivation to a Rotator Cuff Exercise Program for Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy: A Single-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.
BACKGROUND: Treatments for rotator cuff tendinopathy include rotator cuff muscle strengthening to promote better muscle recruitment in order to minimize subacromial narrowing during active movement. Glenohumeral adductor recruitment has also been shown to prevent such narrowing in asymptomatic individuals; therefore, adding glenohumeral adductor coactivation during rotator cuff strengthening could enhance the efficacy of rotator cuff strengthening. However, no study has explored its benefits.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the short-term efficacy of adding glenohumeral adductor coactivation to a rotator cuff-strengthening program to improve function, reduce symptoms, and increase acromiohumeral distance in adults with rotator cuff tendinopathy.
METHODS: In this single-blind randomized controlled trial, 42 participants with rotator cuff tendinopathy were randomly assigned to 2 groups, one that received strengthening of the scapular and rotator cuff muscles or one that received rotator cuff strengthening plus coactivation with pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi recruitment. The daily programs were performed at home for 6 weeks, with supervised training and follow-up sessions. Functional limitations/symptoms (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] questionnaire as the primary outcome, and the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index), pain (visual analog scale), and acromiohumeral distance were measured at baseline, 3 weeks, and 6 weeks. Data were analyzed using a mixed-model analysis of variance.
RESULTS: No significant group-by-time interaction was observed for the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index, visual analog scale, and acromiohumeral distance (P≥.055). Significant time effects were obtained for the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index and visual analog scale for pain with movement (P<.001).
CONCLUSION: The present findings show that adding glenohumeral adductor coactivation to a rotator cuff-strengthening program does not result in improved short-term efficacy in any of the measured outcomes. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02837848).
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 1b. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(3):126-135. Epub 30 Nov 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8240.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the short-term efficacy of adding glenohumeral adductor coactivation to a rotator cuff-strengthening program to improve function, reduce symptoms, and increase acromiohumeral distance in adults with rotator cuff tendinopathy.
METHODS: In this single-blind randomized controlled trial, 42 participants with rotator cuff tendinopathy were randomly assigned to 2 groups, one that received strengthening of the scapular and rotator cuff muscles or one that received rotator cuff strengthening plus coactivation with pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi recruitment. The daily programs were performed at home for 6 weeks, with supervised training and follow-up sessions. Functional limitations/symptoms (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] questionnaire as the primary outcome, and the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index), pain (visual analog scale), and acromiohumeral distance were measured at baseline, 3 weeks, and 6 weeks. Data were analyzed using a mixed-model analysis of variance.
RESULTS: No significant group-by-time interaction was observed for the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index, visual analog scale, and acromiohumeral distance (P≥.055). Significant time effects were obtained for the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index and visual analog scale for pain with movement (P<.001).
CONCLUSION: The present findings show that adding glenohumeral adductor coactivation to a rotator cuff-strengthening program does not result in improved short-term efficacy in any of the measured outcomes. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02837848).
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 1b. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(3):126-135. Epub 30 Nov 2018. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8240.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app