| Title |
Scapular-focused treatment in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome: a randomized clinical trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Rheumatology, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10067-012-2093-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
F. Struyf, J. Nijs, S. Mollekens, I. Jeurissen, S. Truijen, S. Mottram, R. Meeusen |
| Abstract |
The purpose of this clinical trial is to compare the effectiveness of a scapular-focused treatment with a control therapy in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome. Therefore, a randomized clinical trial with a blinded assessor was used in 22 patients with shoulder impingement syndrome. The primary outcome measures included self-reported shoulder disability and pain. Next, patients were evaluated regarding scapular positioning and shoulder muscle strength. The scapular-focused treatment included stretching and scapular motor control training. The control therapy included stretching, muscle friction, and eccentric rotator cuff training. Main outcome measures were the shoulder disability questionnaire, diagnostic tests for shoulder impingement syndrome, clinical tests for scapular positioning, shoulder pain (visual analog scale; VAS), and muscle strength. A large clinically important treatment effect in favor of scapular motor control training was found in self-reported disability (Cohen's d = 0.93, p = 0.025), and a moderate to large clinically important improvement in pain during the Neer test, Hawkins test, and empty can test (Cohen's d 0.76, 1.04, and 0.92, respectively). In addition, the experimental group demonstrated a moderate (Cohen's d = 0.67) improvement in self-experienced pain at rest (VAS), whereas the control group did not change. The effects were maintained at three months follow-up. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 6 | 20% |
| Canada | 5 | 17% |
| United States | 4 | 13% |
| Spain | 3 | 10% |
| Norway | 2 | 7% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 7% |
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 26 | 87% |
| Scientists | 2 | 7% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 7% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 646 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | <1% |
| Portugal | 2 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 2 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Brazil | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Iran, Islamic Republic of | 1 | <1% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 631 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 133 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 109 | 17% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 49 | 8% |
| Other | 48 | 7% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 6% |
| Other | 120 | 19% |
| Unknown | 149 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 186 | 29% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 161 | 25% |
| Sports and Recreations | 56 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 2% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 9 | 1% |
| Other | 40 | 6% |
| Unknown | 180 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 23. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 May 2022.
All research outputs
#1,449,453
of 23,144,579 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Rheumatology
#135
of 3,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,407
of 173,313 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Rheumatology
#3
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,144,579 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,056 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 173,313 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.