Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT06010381

Muscle Energy Technique Versus Maitland Mobilization on Shoulder Pain and Disability

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of muscle energy technique versus Maitland's mobilization on shoulder pain and disability after neck dissection surgeries.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Neck Cancer Arthralgia Head and Neck Neoplasms Joint Diseases Mental Disorders Mobility Limitation Musculoskeletal Diseases Neoplasms Neoplasms by Site Neurologic Manifestations Pain Pain Syndrome Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms Shoulder Pain Signs and Symptoms Somatoform Disorders Surgery

Age range

25 year–70 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Shaimaa Mohamed Ahmed El Sayeh

Cairo, 02, Egypt

About this study

Thirty patients with shoulder pain and limited ROM post-neck dissection surgeries participated in this study. Patients were subdivided into two groups, fifteen patients in each group. Group A received the muscle energy technique and group B received Maitland's mobilization.

Data obtained from both groups regarding the Visual Analogue Scale, it has a 100-mm-long horizontal line labeled ''no pain' (with or without related facial expressions) at one extreme and ''worst pain ever' at the other. Pain intensity is determined by the length of the line as measured from the left-hand side to the point marked, The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, it has two subscales; The pain subscale includes five questions about pain intensity. The disability subscale includes eight questions about difficulty in different orders. Each question of both pain and disability subscale was scaled in numeric ratings ranging from 0 to 10. Each score was summed up and transformed into percentages. Finally, the average score between pain and disability subscale comprised the total SPADI scores ranging from 0 (the best) to 100 (the worst), and shoulder flexion, abduction, and external ROM were statistically analyzed and compared.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Age range between 25-70 years.
  • Male and female patients participated in the study.
  • All patients had shoulder pain following different NDS
  • All patients had no previous shoulder pain.
  • All patients enrolled in the study had their informed consent.

Exclusion criteria

  • Previous shoulder pain from any other causes.
  • Pregnancy.
  • Epileptics.
  • Radiotherapy.
  • Chemotherapy.

Treatment and study plan

Muscle Energy Technique

Other

It was applied on the shoulder flexion and the external rotation. An isometric contraction of the agonist muscle (the muscle which requires stretching) for 7 seconds with gentle muscle contraction to avoid the risk of increasing the muscle tone. This contraction started just short of the restrictive barrier. After that, the patient is asked to relax for 2-3 seconds and then the therapist stretches the contracted muscle in the opposite direction for 30 seconds. This is repeated three repetitions for each muscle.

Maitland mobilization

Other

At the start of each session, the physical therapist examined the patient's ROM in all directions to obtain information about the end-range position and the end feel of the glenohumeral joint. Start with rhythmic mid-range mobilization with the patient in a supine position. The therapist's hands are placed close to the glenohumeral joint, and the humerus is brought into a position of maximal flexion in the sagittal plane. After 10 to 15 repetitions of intensive mobilization techniques in this end-range position, the direction of mobilization will be altered by varying the plane of elevation or by varying the degree of rotation. When alternating the direction of mobilization, other movements such as gliding techniques and distraction in that joint position were (inferior gliding, anterior gliding, and posterior gliding).

Traditional shoulder exercise

Other

Traditional shoulder exercises in the form of shoulder range of motion exercises, stretching exercises and, scapular stabilization.

Primary outcomes

  1. Visual analogue scale

    Time frame: Change from baseline at four weeks after the intervention

    A Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) is one of the pain rating scales used for the first time in 1921 by Hayes and Patterson. It is often used in epidemiology and clinical research to measure the intensity or frequency of various symptoms. It has a 100-mm-long horizontal line labeled ''no pain' (with or without related facial expressions) at one extreme and ''worst pain ever' at the other. Pain intensity is determined by the length of the line as measured from the left-hand side to the point marked.

  2. Shoulder Pain and Disability Index

    Time frame: Change from baseline at four weeks after the intervention

    It is a self-reported questionnaire consisting of 13 items divided in two parts: pain and disability sub-scale. The pain subscale includes five questions about pain intensity. The disability subscale includes eight questions about difficulty in different orders. Each question of both pain and disability subscale was scaled in numeric ratings ranging from 0 to 10. Each score was summed up and transformed into percentages. Finally, the average score between pain and disability subscale comprised the total SPADI scores ranging from 0 (the best) to 100 (the worst).

  3. Shoulder active range of motion

    Time frame: Change from baseline at four weeks after the intervention

    Through using the universal goniometer to measure the shoulder flexion, abduction and, external rotation.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Cairo University

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Muscle Energy Technique Versus Maitland Mobilization on Shoulder Pain and Disability After Neck Dissection Surgeries.

Important dates

Study start
2021
Primary completion
2023
Study completion
2023
First posted
Aug 24, 2023
Registry last updated
Apr 17, 2024

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.