Department of Clinical Science and Translational Medicine, University of Roma "Tor Vergata", 00133 Rome, Italy.
Department of Human Neurosciences, University of Roma "Sapienza", 00185 Rome, Italy.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Aug 7;19(15):9715. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19159715.
Purpose: To investigate the efficacy of manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) compared to other non-surgical therapeutic strategies for patients with frozen shoulder contracture syndrome (FSCS). Methods: A systematic review of literature was conducted. A literature search was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PEDro, Cochrane Central Library and Scopus. Only randomized controlled trials were included and assessed for critical appraisal through the Cochrane Collaborations tools. Results: Five randomized controlled trials were included. The overall risk of bias (RoB) was high in 4 out of 5 of the included studies. MUA was found to be not superior in terms of reduction of pain and improvement of function when compared to cortisone injections with hydrodilatation (mean regression coefficient MUA −2.77 vs. injection −2.75; 95% CI (−1.11 to 1.15)) and home exercise (mean difference 95% CI: 0.2 (−0.64 to 1.02)) in the short term (3 months), and cortisone injections with hydrodilatation (mean regression coefficient MUA 3.13 vs. injection 3.23; 95% CI (−0.90 to 1.11)) in the long term (>6 months). Moreover, if compared to structured physiotherapy, MUA highlighted a higher Oxford Shoulder Score at final 1-year follow up (mean difference 95% CI: 1.05 (−1.28 to 3.39); p = 0.38). Similar results were obtained for disability, with statistically no significant long-term (>12 months) differences between MUA and home exercise (mean difference 95% CI: 0 (−3.2 to 3.2)) or structured physiotherapy (mean difference 95% CI: −0.50 (−5.70 to 4.70); p = 0.85)). Only two trials reported adverse events. Conclusions: This review suggested that limited and inconsistent evidence currently exists on the efficacy of MUA compared to other non-surgical strategies in the management of patients with FSCS. Future research should focus on clinical trials with higher methodological quality.
探讨麻醉下手法松解(MUA)与其他非手术治疗策略相比,在治疗冻结肩挛缩综合征(FSCS)患者中的疗效。
进行了系统的文献回顾。在 MEDLINE、EMBASE、PEDro、Cochrane 中央图书馆和 Scopus 中进行了文献检索。仅纳入随机对照试验,并通过 Cochrane 协作工具对其进行了关键性评估。
纳入了 5 项随机对照试验。5 项研究中有 4 项的总体偏倚风险(RoB)较高。与皮质类固醇注射加液压扩张(平均回归系数 MUA-2.77 与注射-2.75;95%CI(-1.11 至 1.15))和家庭运动(平均差值 95%CI:0.2(-0.64 至 1.02))相比,MUA 在短期(3 个月)时减轻疼痛和改善功能方面并不优越,与皮质类固醇注射加液压扩张(平均回归系数 MUA 3.13 与注射 3.23;95%CI(-0.90 至 1.11))相比在长期(>6 个月)时也不优越。此外,如果与结构化物理治疗相比,MUA 在最终 1 年随访时的牛津肩部评分更高(平均差值 95%CI:1.05(-1.28 至 3.39);p = 0.38)。在残疾方面也得到了类似的结果,MUA 与家庭运动(平均差值 95%CI:0(-3.2 至 3.2))或结构化物理治疗(平均差值 95%CI:-0.50(-5.70 至 4.70))之间在长期(>12 个月)没有统计学显著差异(p = 0.85))。只有两项试验报告了不良事件。
本综述表明,与其他非手术策略相比,目前关于 MUA 在 FSCS 患者管理中的疗效的证据有限且不一致。未来的研究应侧重于方法学质量更高的临床试验。