Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34117042›Full record

Trial reportBMJ open2021

Experiences and perceptions of trial participants and healthcare professionals in the UK Frozen Shoulder Trial (UK FROST): a nested qualitative study.

Cynthia Srikesavan, Francine Toye, Stephen Brealey, Lorna Goodchild, Matthew Northgraves, Charalambos P Charalambous, Amar Rangan, Sarah Lamb

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 47% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Cynthia SrikesavanNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology, and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3540-8052
Francine ToyePhysiotherapy Research Unit, Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford, UK Francine.Toye@ouh.nhs.uk.
Stephen BrealeyYork Trials Unit, ARRC Building, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Lorna GoodchildThe James Cook University Hospital, South Tees Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Middlesbrough, UK.
Matthew NorthgravesHull York Medical School, Hull, UK.
Charalambos P CharalambousBlackpool Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Blackpool, UK.
Amar RanganYork Trials Unit, ARRC Building, Department of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5452-8578
Sarah LambNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology, and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GBUniversity of York · GBHull York Medical School · GBJames Cook University Hospital · GBUniversity of Exeter · GBUniversity of Lancashire · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore the experiences and perceptions of trial participants and healthcare professionals in the UK Frozen Shoulder Trial (UK FROST), a multicentre randomised controlled trial that compared manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA), arthroscopic capsular release (ACR) with a 12-week early structured physiotherapy programme (ESP) in people with unilateral frozen shoulder referred to secondary care.

designNested qualitative study with semistructured interviews. We used constant comparison method to develop our themes.

settingThis qualitative study was nested within the UK FROST.

participants44 trial participants (ESP: 14; MUA: 15; ACR: 15), and 8 surgeons and 8 physiotherapists who delivered the treatments in the trial.

resultsTrial participants found UK FROST treatments acceptable and satisfactory in terms of content, delivery and treatment benefits. Participants in all arms experienced improvements in pain, shoulder movements, and function. Participants said they would choose the same treatment that they received in the trial.Surgeons and physiotherapists felt that the content and delivery of UK FROST treatments was not significantly different to their routine practice except for the additional number of physiotherapy sessions offered in the trial. They had mixed feelings about the effectiveness of UK FROST treatments. Both stressed the value of including hydrodilatation as a comparator of other treatment options. Physiotherapists raised concerns about the capacity to deliver the number of UK FROST physiotherapy sessions in routine clinical settings.Shared perceptions of trial participants, surgeons and physiotherapists were: (1) Pain relief and return of shoulder movements and function are important outcomes and (2) Adherence to exercises leads to better outcomes.

conclusionIn general, our findings indicated that trial participants, and surgeons and physiotherapists who delivered the treatments had positive experiences and perceptions in the UK FROST. Early qualitative investigations to explore the feasibility of delivering treatments in real-world settings are suggested in future trials in the frozen shoulder. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Register, ID: ISRCTN48804508. Registered on 25 July 2014; Results.

Indexed as

BursitisHumansPerceptionPhysical Therapy ModalitiesSecondary Health CareUnited Kingdomelbow & shouldermusculoskeletal disordersshoulder

Identifiers

PMID34117042
PMCPMC8202103
OpenAlexW3171313871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.