ABSTRACT
Background: Frozen shoulder is defined as an idiopathic condition of the shoulder characterized by the spontaneous onset of pain in the shoulder with restriction of movement in every direction. Prevalence of frozen shoulder was found to be 3.06% in a regional community based study. Frozen shoulder is a discrete clinical diagnosis for painful restriction of shoulder motion that results from capsular fibrosis. It is usually present in age group between 40-60 years. Muscle Energy (MET) technique is very much beneficial in this condition. Muscle energy techniques are class of soft tissue osteopathic manipulation consisting of isometric contraction design to improve musculoskeletal function and reduce pain. MET combined along with scapular Mobilization gives much better effect. So, the aim of the study is to check the effectiveness of muscle energy technique and mobilization to improve shoulder range of motion frozen shoulder. Materials and methods: 60 patients were included in the study which was divided into two groups; Group A and Group B, 30 patients in each group. Subjects were randomly selected and assigned to each group. Pre-test measurements of the patient were done with the help of two measures VAS, Shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) and Goniometer was used for assessing range motion of shoulder movements for each group. The Subjects in Group-A were given muscle energy technique. The Subjects in Group-B were given maitland technique. Then the Result analysis was done. Sreenivasu Kotagiri, Neeti Mathur, Vadana, Gayathri Balakavi, Anup Kumar Songa. The Effectiveness of Muscle Energy Technique and Mobilization to Improve the Shoulder Range of Motion in Frozen Shoulder. IAIM, 2019; 6(10): 64-73. Page 65 Results: On comparing Group A and Group B for post-treatment VAS and SPADI score, results showed a significant difference (p=0.001). The overall study proved that MET is beneficial in improving Pain and decreasing the disability level. Conclusion: The analysis obtained indicated that Group A (Muscle energy Technique) showed more significant improvement when compared to Group B (Mobilization).