Gomes Cid André Fidelis de Paula, Dibai-Filho Almir Vieira, Moreira William Arruda, Rivas Shirley Quispe, Silva Emanuela Dos Santos, Garrido Ana Claudia Bogik
Department of Physical Therapy, Nove de Julho University, São Paulo, Brazil.
Department of Physical Education, Federal University of Maranhão, São Luís, Maranhão Brazil.
J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2018 Mar-Apr;41(3):218-226. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2017.09.009. Epub 2018 Feb 16.
The purpose of this study was to measure the additional effect of adding interferential current (IFC) to an exercise and manual therapy program for patients with unilateral shoulder impingement syndrome.
Forty-five participants were randomly assigned to group 1 (exercise and manual therapy), group 2 (exercise and manual therapy + IFC), or group 3 (exercise and manual therapy + placebo ultrasound). Individuals participated in 16 treatment sessions, twice a week for 8 weeks. The primary outcome of the study was total score of the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI). The secondary outcomes were the pain and disability subscales of SPADI, Numeric Rating Scale, and Pain-Related Self-Statement Scale. Adjusted between-group mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using linear mixed models.
After 16 treatment sessions, statistically significant but not clinically important differences were identified in favor of the exercise and manual therapy program alone in the SPADI-total (group 1 vs group 2, MD 11.12 points, 95% CI 5.90-16.35; group 1 vs group 3, MD 13.43 points, 95% CI 8.21-18.65). Similar results were identified for secondary outcomes.
The addition of IFC does not generate greater clinical effects in an exercise and manual therapy program for individuals with unilateral shoulder impingement syndrome.
本研究旨在测量对单侧肩峰撞击综合征患者在运动及手法治疗方案中添加干扰电流(IFC)的额外效果。
45名参与者被随机分配至第1组(运动及手法治疗)、第2组(运动及手法治疗 + IFC)或第3组(运动及手法治疗 + 安慰剂超声)。个体参加16次治疗课程,每周两次,共8周。本研究的主要结局为肩痛和功能障碍指数(SPADI)总分。次要结局为SPADI的疼痛和功能障碍分量表、数字评定量表以及与疼痛相关的自我陈述量表。使用线性混合模型计算组间调整后平均差异(MDs)及95%置信区间(CIs)。
16次治疗课程后,在SPADI总分方面发现了统计学上显著但临床上无重要意义的差异,单独的运动及手法治疗方案更具优势(第1组与第2组比较,MD为11.12分,95%CI为5.90 - 16.35;第1组与第3组比较,MD为13.43分,95%CI为8.21 - 18.65)。次要结局也得到了类似结果。
对于单侧肩峰撞击综合征患者,在运动及手法治疗方案中添加IFC不会产生更大的临床效果。