Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 May 18;25(1):71-83.
doi: 10.29337/ijsp.25.

Intramuscular Electrical Stimulation Combined with Therapeutic Exercises in Patients with Shoulder Adhesive Capsulitis: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Sukumar Shanmugam  1   2 , Lawrence Mathias  3 , Nagarajan Manickaraj  4 , K U Dhanesh Kumar  2 , Praveen Kumar Kandakurti  1 , Sathees Kumar Dorairaj  1 , Ramprasad Muthukrishnan  1
Affiliations

Intramuscular Electrical Stimulation Combined with Therapeutic Exercises in Patients with Shoulder Adhesive Capsulitis: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Sukumar Shanmugam et al. Int J Surg Protoc. .

Abstract

Background: Myofascial trigger points (MTrPs) precipitate the shoulder pain severity and disability in patients with shoulder adhesive capsulitis (SAC). This study aims to compare the effectiveness of intramuscular electrical stimulation (IMES) combined with therapeutic exercises versus dry needling (DN) combined with therapeutic exercises in improving the clinical outcomes in patients with SAC.

Methods and materials: In this randomized controlled trial, IMES (n = 45) and DN (43) groups had received respectively IMES, and DN twice weekly for three consecutive weeks. Both groups received therapeutic exercises 1520 minutes, five days in a week during the second and third week. Pain, disability, kinesiophobia, number of active and latent MTrPs, shoulder abduction and external rotation range of motion were assessed at baseline, week-1, week-2, week-3 and follow-up at 3 months. A repeated measures ANOVA performed to find out the significant differences in the clinical outcomes between the groups.

Results: The results of repeated measures of ANOVA shows that the post intervention timelines assessment scores of VAS, DASH, shoulder abduction and external rotation ROM, number of active and latent MTrPs and kinesiophobia were significantly (p. < 0.05) improved in both groups. However, IMES group had achieved a greater improvement over DN group (p. < 0.05) on the shoulder pain severity and disability, shoulder range of motion, number of active and latent MTrPs and kinesiophobia. Despite the significant statistical differences between the groups, IMES group did not achieve the minimal clinically important differences of 1.5cm and 11-points respectively for the VAS and DASH scores. No serious adverse effects occurred during the three weeks of treatment.

Conclusion: IMES combined with therapeutic exercises is an effective treatment to reduce the shoulder pain severity and upper limb disability by deactivating the active and latent MTrPs and improving the shoulder abduction and external rotation range of motion in patients with SAC.

Keywords: Dry needling; Electrical stimulation; Myofascial pain; Shoulder exercises; Trigger points; adhesive capsulitis; frozen shoulder; shoulder pain.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no competing interests to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Dry needling procedure for shoulder girdle muscles.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Procedure of intramuscular electrical stimulation. Note: Above picture shows the electrode placement for the IMES of Rhomboid and infraspinatus muscle. Black color lead indicate channel 1 and red color lead indicate channel 2. Cathode lead connected to the paraspinal level needle electrode and anode lead connected to the needle electrode of shoulder girdle muscles.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Consort flow diagram of study procedure.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Georgiannos D, Markopoulos G, Devetzi E, Bisbinas I. Adhesive Capsulitis of the Shoulder. Is there Consensus Regarding the Treatment? A Comprehensive Review. Open Orthopaedics Journal. 2017; 11: pp. 65–76.. DOI: 10.2174/1874325001711010065 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vermeulen HM, Rozing PM, Obermann WR, Cessie S, Vlieland T. Comparison of high-grade and low-grade mobilization techniques in the management of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder: Randomized clinical trial. Physical Therapy. 2006; 86: pp. 355–368.. DOI: 10.1093/ptj/86.3.355 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Candela V, Giannicola G, Passaretti D, Venditto T, Gumina S. Adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder: pain intensity and distribution. Musculoskeletal Surgery. 2017; 101(Suppl 2): pp. 153–158.. DOI: 10.1007/s12306-017-0488-6 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Nijis J, Daenen L, Cras P, Struyf F, Roussel N, Oostendrorp R. Nociception affects motor output: a review on sensory-motor interaction with focus on clinical implications. Clinical Journal of Pain. 2012; 28: pp. 175–181.. DOI: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e318225daf3 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Le HV, Lee SJ, Nazarian A, Rodriguez EK. Adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder: review of pathophysiology and current clinical treatments. Shoulder Elbow. 2017; 9(2): pp. 75–84.. DOI: 10.1177/1758573216676786 - DOI - PMC - PubMed