Cette page a été traduite automatiquement et l'exactitude de la traduction n'est pas garantie. Veuillez vous référer au version anglaise pour un texte source.

Spinal Mobilization With Arm Movement and Kaltenborn Mobilization in Adhesive Capsulitis (SMWAM)

23 juillet 2026 mis à jour par: Riphah International University

Effects of Spinal Mobilization With Arm Movement and Kaltenborn Mobilization on Pain, Range of Motion, Functional Reaching, and Disability in Adhesive Capsulitis

To compare the effects of spinal mobilization with arm movement and Kaltenborn Mobilization on pain, range of motion, functional reaching, and disability in patients with Adhesive Capsulitis.

Aperçu de l'étude

Description détaillée

A randomized clinical trial compared the effectiveness of Kaltenborn mobilization and muscle energy techniques in individuals with adhesive capsulitis. Seventy-six participants were randomly allocated into two treatment groups. Pain, shoulder range of motion, and disability were assessed using the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), goniometry, and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) at baseline and after four weeks of treatment. The findings demonstrated that Kaltenborn mobilization produced greater improvements in pain reduction, shoulder range of motion, and functional ability.

A quasi-experimental study evaluated the effects of Kaltenborn mobilization and muscle energy techniques in patients with chronic adhesive capsulitis. Participants received their respective manual therapy interventions in combination with conventional rehabilitation. Shoulder external rotation, shoulder abduction, pain intensity, and functional disability were assessed before and after treatment. The results indicated that Kaltenborn mobilization was more effective than muscle energy techniques in improving shoulder mobility, reducing pain, and enhancing functional outcomes.

A randomized controlled trial compared muscle energy techniques with Kaltenborn mobilization for improving shoulder range of motion in individuals with adhesive capsulitis. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and during follow-up using goniometric measurements. The findings showed that muscle energy techniques produced greater improvements in shoulder flexion and abduction, whereas rotational movements demonstrated no clear advantage over Kaltenborn mobilization.

A randomized clinical trial investigated the effects of Spinal Mobilization with Arm Movement (SMWAM) compared with the Maitland mobilization technique on shoulder function. Pain, shoulder range of motion, and muscle activity were evaluated before and after treatment. The results demonstrated that spinal mobilization with arm movement effectively reduced pain, normalized shoulder muscle activity, and increased shoulder range of motion.

A randomized controlled trial compared the effects of anterior and posterior Grade III Kaltenborn glides on shoulder function in patients with adhesive capsulitis. External rotation and functional ability were evaluated using goniometric measurements and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI). The findings indicated that posterior gliding mobilization resulted in greater improvements in external rotation and shoulder function than anterior gliding.

A randomized controlled trial examined the immediate effects of Spinal Mobilization with Arm Movement (SMWAM) on shoulder performance. The intervention involved cervical spinal mobilization combined with repeated active arm abduction. The study reported immediate improvements in shoulder movement and suggested that SMWAM enhances shoulder function by correcting cervical spinal alignment and stimulating joint mechanoreceptors.

Although both Spinal Mobilization with Arm Movement (SMWAM) and Kaltenborn Mobilization have demonstrated beneficial effects in reducing pain and improving shoulder mobility, existing evidence has primarily evaluated these techniques independently or compared them with other manual therapy approaches. Direct comparative evidence between SMWAM and Kaltenborn Mobilization in individuals with adhesive capsulitis remains limited, particularly regarding their effects on pain, range of motion, functional reaching, and disability. Therefore, further comparative research is warranted to determine the more effective intervention for optimizing functional recovery in patients with adhesive capsulitis.

Type d'étude

Interventionnel

Inscription (Estimé)

50

Phase

  • N'est pas applicable

Contacts et emplacements

Cette section fournit les coordonnées de ceux qui mènent l'étude et des informations sur le lieu où cette étude est menée.

Coordonnées de l'étude

Lieux d'étude

    • Punjab Province
      • Lahore, Punjab Province, Pakistan, 54000
        • Recrutement
        • Jinnah Hospital
        • Contact:
      • Lahore, Punjab Province, Pakistan, 54000
        • Recrutement
        • Alfalah Medical Center
        • Contact:

Critères de participation

Les chercheurs recherchent des personnes qui correspondent à une certaine description, appelée critères d'éligibilité. Certains exemples de ces critères sont l'état de santé général d'une personne ou des traitements antérieurs.

Critère d'éligibilité

Âges éligibles pour étudier

  • Adulte

Accepte les volontaires sains

Non

La description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Age 35-50 years
  • Both male and female genders
  • Pain rating 3 to 7 on NPRS for at least 3 months
  • Idiopathic frozen shoulder
  • Stage II and III frozen shoulder
  • Positive Apley's Scratch test
  • Unilateral frozen shoulder
  • Frozen shoulder with at least 25% restricted ROM
  • Presence of global restriction in passive range of motion (PROM) in a capsular pattern (ER > ABD > IR)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Arthritic shoulder
  • Rotator cuff disease
  • Post-traumatic stiff shoulder
  • Post-CABG shoulder-hand syndrome
  • Post-stroke frozen shoulder
  • Bilateral frozen shoulder
  • Complex Regional Pain Syndrome
  • Any fracture or other injury
  • Any systemic illness
  • Any inflammatory disease (Rheumatoid arthritis, gout)
  • Any neurological disease
  • Frozen Shoulder secondary to Brachial Plexus Injury, Parkinsonism, Ankylosis, Infection, or Arthroplasty
  • Tendon calcification

Plan d'étude

Cette section fournit des détails sur le plan d'étude, y compris la façon dont l'étude est conçue et ce que l'étude mesure.

Comment l'étude est-elle conçue ?

Détails de conception

  • Objectif principal: Traitement
  • Répartition: Randomisé
  • Modèle interventionnel: Affectation parallèle
  • Masquage: Seul

Armes et Interventions

Groupe de participants / Bras
Intervention / Traitement
Comparateur actif: Spinal Mobilization with Arm Movement
Participants will be seated upright while the therapist applies a sustained transverse glide to the C4 spinous process toward the side opposite the affected shoulder. The glide will be maintained as the participant actively abducts the affected arm to the pain-free or maximum tolerated range and returns to the starting position. The technique will be performed for 10 repetitions per session, ensuring controlled movement, proper posture, and patient comfort throughout the intervention.
Intervention: Spinal Mobilization with Arm Movement (SMWAM) Position: Participant seated upright with neutral spine and head posture Technique: Sustained transverse glide applied to the C4 spinous process toward the side opposite the affected shoulder during active shoulder abduction Movement: Active shoulder abduction to the pain-free or maximum tolerated range, followed by return to the starting position while maintaining the glide Dosage: 10 repetitions per session Purpose: To reduce pain, improve shoulder mobility, and enhance functional movement.
Autres noms:
  • SMWAM
Expérimental: Kaltenborn Mobilization
Following the application of a moist hot pack, participants will receive Kaltenborn Grade I glenohumeral traction followed by Grade III ventral glide and Grade III caudal glide in the same treatment session. Each mobilization will be performed for 15 repetitions, with a 30-second sustained hold and 10-second rest between repetitions, for a total treatment time of approximately 10 minutes. The techniques will be applied in standardized patient positions with appropriate scapular stabilization to improve glenohumeral joint mobility, reduce pain, and increase shoulder range of motion.
Intervention: Kaltenborn Mobilization Technique (KMT) Pre-treatment: Moist hot pack application Techniques: Grade I glenohumeral traction, Grade III ventral glide, and Grade III caudal glide Dosage: 15 repetitions of each technique with a 30-second hold and 10-second rest between repetitions Duration: Approximately 10 minutes per session Purpose: To improve glenohumeral joint mobility, reduce pain, and increase shoulder range of motion.
Autres noms:
  • KMT

Que mesure l'étude ?

Principaux critères de jugement

Mesure des résultats
Description de la mesure
Délai
Pain by Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Délai: 6 weeks
The Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) is an 11-point self-reported scale (0 = no pain, 10 = worst imaginable pain) used to assess pain intensity in clinical and research settings.
6 weeks
Range of Motion (External Rotation, Abduction, Internal Rotation)
Délai: 6 weeks
A goniometer is a standard clinical instrument used to measure joint range of motion (ROM)
6 weeks
Functional Disability
Délai: 6 weeks
The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) is a 13-item self-administered questionnaire used to assess shoulder pain and functional disability.
6 weeks

Collaborateurs et enquêteurs

C'est ici que vous trouverez les personnes et les organisations impliquées dans cette étude.

Les enquêteurs

  • Chercheur principal: Annum Manzoor, MS OMPT, Riphah International University

Publications et liens utiles

La personne responsable de la saisie des informations sur l'étude fournit volontairement ces publications. Il peut s'agir de tout ce qui concerne l'étude.

Publications générales

Dates d'enregistrement des études

Ces dates suivent la progression des dossiers d'étude et des soumissions de résultats sommaires à ClinicalTrials.gov. Les dossiers d'étude et les résultats rapportés sont examinés par la Bibliothèque nationale de médecine (NLM) pour s'assurer qu'ils répondent à des normes de contrôle de qualité spécifiques avant d'être publiés sur le site Web public.

Dates principales de l'étude

Début de l'étude (Réel)

1 juillet 2026

Achèvement primaire (Estimé)

1 août 2026

Achèvement de l'étude (Estimé)

1 septembre 2026

Dates d'inscription aux études

Première soumission

21 juillet 2026

Première soumission répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité

23 juillet 2026

Première publication (Réel)

24 juillet 2026

Mises à jour des dossiers d'étude

Dernière mise à jour publiée (Réel)

24 juillet 2026

Dernière mise à jour soumise répondant aux critères de contrôle qualité

23 juillet 2026

Dernière vérification

1 juillet 2026

Plus d'information

Termes liés à cette étude

Plan pour les données individuelles des participants (IPD)

Prévoyez-vous de partager les données individuelles des participants (DPI) ?

NON

Informations sur les médicaments et les dispositifs, documents d'étude

Étudie un produit pharmaceutique réglementé par la FDA américaine

Non

Étudie un produit d'appareil réglementé par la FDA américaine

Non

Ces informations ont été extraites directement du site Web clinicaltrials.gov sans aucune modification. Si vous avez des demandes de modification, de suppression ou de mise à jour des détails de votre étude, veuillez contacter register@clinicaltrials.gov. Dès qu'un changement est mis en œuvre sur clinicaltrials.gov, il sera également mis à jour automatiquement sur notre site Web .

S'abonner