Comparison of the physiotherapy with and without focus on the scapulothoracic joint on pain, range of motion, functional disability, quality of life, and treatment effectiveness of patients after arthroscopic shoulder rotator cuff tendon repair: A randomized controlled trial with short-term follow-up

Abstract

BackgroundRotator cuff tears are prevalent shoulder injuries, significantly affecting shoulder stabilization and patient quality of life. Despite rehabilitation efforts post-arthroscopic surgery, the efficacy of scapular-focused exercises remains uncertain with limited supportive evidence. PurposeThis study aimed to compare the immediate and short-term effects of emphasizing scapulothoracic joint rehabilitation in addition to conventional physiotherapy on pain, range of motion (ROM), function, quality of life, and treatment effectiveness in patients after shoulder arthroscopic rotator cuff tendon repair (ARCR). Study DesignTwo arms, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial, with concealed allocation MethodsThis parallel-group randomized controlled trial, with concealed allocation, was conducted in a clinic setting on 28 participants aged 30-75 years, exhibiting progressive degenerative full-thickness tears of rotator cuff muscles and undergoing ARCR, provided the tear size was small or medium. Participants were randomly allocated to receive 21 sessions of conventional rehabilitation (n = 14) or comprehensive rehabilitation (with a focus on scapula training; n = 14) in 12 weeks (reporting of intervention complied with Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) and Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) Guideline). Pain (as primary outcome), ROM, functional disability, quality of life, and treatment effectiveness were assessed both pre- and post-intervention, along with a 3-month follow-up. Participants, assessors, and statistician were blinded to group assignment. For the reporting of the RCT, the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) has been used. ResultsTrial was completed with 28 participants and no dropouts. The analysis of variance revealed statistically significant group-by-time interaction (p < 0.05) for all outcome measures except for active ROMs (p > 0.05). Multiple comparison analysis showed statistically significant between-group differences (p < 0.05) at 3-month follow-up with large effect size (>0.8 Hedges’ g) for all outcomes (mean differences: visual analog scale: 1.3, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons: −17.3, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index: 17.6, Western Ontario Rotator Cuff: −19.5, QuickDASH: 17.8), except for extension ROM (passive ROM: confidence interval = −25.4 to 0.56; active ROM: confidence interval = −20.0 to 6.0). The differences in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Western Ontario Rotator Cuff were also clinically significant based on their minimally clinical important difference cutoff points. For the Global Rating of Change scale, more participants stated “much improved” in the comprehensive group than in the conventional. No adverse effects were reported. ConclusionsComprehensive rehabilitation, compared to conventional physiotherapy, has shown a statistically and clinically significant difference in improving pain, ROM, functional disability, quality of life, and treatment effectiveness in patients after ARCR.