Dosage of joint mobilization for the management of patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Evidence supporting type and dosage of joint mobilizations and rationale for selecting joint mobilization dosage for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain are limited. OBJECTIVES: This scoping review aimed to systematically map the type and dosage of joint mobilizations used in previous trials for managing patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain; and summarize the rationale for adopting a specific joint mobilization dosage. METHODS: We searched six databases. We included randomised controlled trials using joint mobilization for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. We extracted data regarding technique, treatment joint mobilization dosages and rationale for a specific dosage. RESULTS: We included 32 studies. Most studies did not or partially report technique (67%) and within-session dosage (64%) of passive joint mobilization. Overall treatment was fully reported in 95% of studies. The dosage used for passive joint mobilization was heterogeneous (ranging from grade I to grade V). Most studies (85%) did not or partially report technique of mobilization with movement (MWM), whereas within-session and overall treatment dosages were fully reported in more than 85% of studies. Three sets of 10 repetitions were commonly used within-session dosage for MWM. We found very limited information on the rationale for selecting dosage of joint mobilization. CONCLUSION: We found limited information about the dosage or the rationale for selecting joint mobilization, with a heterogeneous dosage being tested across trials. Our findings highlight the importance of detailed reporting for dosage and rationale for selecting a specific dosage of joint mobilization.

Dosage of joint mobilisation for the management of rotator cuff-related shoulder pain: protocol for a scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Rotator cuff-related shoulder pain is the most common diagnosis of shoulder pain, which ranks as the third most common musculoskeletal disorder. The first-line treatment for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain is physiotherapy, and joint mobilisation is widely used in conjunction with other modalities. The type and dosage of joint mobilisations could influence treatment outcomes for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain, although research evidence is inconclusive. OBJECTIVES: To (1) systematically search, identify and map the reported type and dosage of joint mobilisations used in previous studies for the management of patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain; and (2) summarise the rationale for adopting a specific joint mobilisation dosage. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will follow the methodological framework outlined by Arksey and O'Malley and report the results as per the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guideline. Two authors will independently screen and extract data from the six databases: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library and SPORTDiscus, with publication date from their inceptions to 25 August 2021. A third author will be consulted if the two authors disagree about the inclusion of any study in the review. We will summarise the results using descriptive statistics and qualitative thematic analysis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required for this protocol. Mapping and summarising the reported type and dosage of joint mobilisations for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain from previous studies will provide a foundation for further optimal selection of type and dosage of joint mobilisations for treating patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. The review is part of an ongoing research that focuses on joint mobilisation for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. The results will be disseminated through presentations at academic conferences and a peer-reviewed publication.

Can the neck contribute to persistent symptoms post concussion? Long-term follow up from a prospective descriptive case series.

OBJECTIVE: To describe individual long-term outcomes of people with persistent symptoms following a concussion who received neck treatment as part of multidisciplinary concussion care. A secondary objective is to report on how participants describe the outcomes of neck treatmentMethods: Long-term follow-up for a subgroup of participants in a prospective case series (n = 11). Data were collected at initial assessment, completion of neck treatment, 6 and 12 months including standard questionnaires (Rivermead post-concussion symptoms questionnaire, neck disability index, dizziness handicap inventory); patient-reported measures of headache, dizziness and neck pain and participant descriptions of the effects of neck treatmentResults: Grouped measures of post-concussion symptoms were further improved or sustained at 6 and 12 months. Ten of the 11 participants reported neck treatment as a beneficial part of their care and described the effects on the neck, multiple symptoms and their overall recovery. However, seven participants experienced recurrent headache, neck pain or dizziness at 6- or 12-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: Long-term follow-up of individuals receiving neck treatment shows improvement across a range of patient reported outcomes, yet highlights frequent recurrence of symptoms. Neck treatment can play a valuable role in people's recovery that extends beyond local effects on the neck.

Can the Neck Contribute to Persistent Symptoms Post Concussion? A Prospective Descriptive Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Persistent symptoms post concussion can arise from a range of sources, including the neck. There is little description of neck assessment findings in people with persistent symptoms post concussion. OBJECTIVES: To assess people with persistent symptoms following a concussion and determine whether the neck has also been injured, and to evaluate the potential of the neck to contribute to their symptoms. METHODS: A consecutive series of participants (n = 20) referred for neck assessment were prospectively recruited by 2 providers of a multidisciplinary concussion service for people with persistent symptoms. Data were collected at initial assessment and on completion of neck treatment, which included standard questionnaires (Rivermead Post Concussion Symptoms Questionnaire, Neck Disability Index, Dizziness Handicap Inventory); patient-reported measures of headache, dizziness, and neck pain; physical examination findings; and details of comorbidities. RESULTS: Participants were evaluated at a mean of 7.5 weeks post concussion (median, 5 weeks). On neck assessment, 90% were considered by the clinician to have a neck problem contributing to their current symptoms. Multiple findings were consistent with this view, including moderate-to-severe Neck Disability Index scores (mean ± SD, 33.4 ± 9.5 points), frequent neck pain (85%), frequent moderate-to-severe pain on occiput-C4 segmental assessment (85%), a positive flexion-rotation test (45%), and muscle tenderness (50%-55%). CONCLUSION: Multiple findings were indicative of concurrent neck injury, particularly involving the upper cervical spine. These neck-related findings are important to recognize, as they have the potential to contribute to persistent symptoms post concussion and may respond to neck treatment. This study was prospectively registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12616001183471). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(11):845-854. Epub 1 Jun 2019. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8547.

Clinical characteristics and outcomes of treatment of the cervical spine in patients with persistent post-concussion symptoms: A retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Concussion is typically defined as a mild brain injury, and yet the brain is unlikely to be the only source of persistent post-concussion symptoms. Concurrent injury to the cervical spine in particular is acknowledged as a potential source of common persistent symptoms such as headache, dizziness and neck pain. OBJECTIVES: To describe the cervical spine findings and outcomes of treatment in a series of patients with persistent post-concussion symptoms, and describe the clinical characteristics of a cervicogenic component when it is present. DESIGN: Retrospective chart review of a consecutive series of patients with concussion referred to a physiotherapist for cervical spine assessment. METHOD: Patient charts for all patients over a calendar year referred by a concussion service provider to a physiotherapist for cervical spine assessment were de-identified and transferred to the research team. Clinical data were independently extracted by two research assistants and analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS/FINDINGS: Data were analysed from 46 patient charts. Those with a cervicogenic component (n = 32) were distinguished from those without a cervicogenic component (n = 14) by physical examination findings, particularly pain on manual segmental examination. Physiotherapy treatment of the cervicogenic component (n = 21) achieved improvements in function (mean increase of 3.8 in the patient-specific functional scale), and pain (mean decrease of 4.6 in the numeric pain-rating scale). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical characteristics described give preliminary support to the idea that the cervical spine may contribute to persistent post-concussion symptoms, and highlight the value of physiotherapy assessment and treatment of the cervical spine following a concussive injury.