ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Comparison of the effectiveness of novel intervention on restricted range of motion of shoulder in young healthy subjects.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Un-resolving frozen shoulder: Are we really treating it?Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of four novel and pragmatic interventions on the restricted range of motion (ROM) of shoulder joint in healthy subjects.
methodsThe study was conducted at Helping Hand Institute of Rehabilitation Sciences, Mansehra, in 6-months duration. This quasi-experimental study recruited 120 young subjects with an equal proportion of males and females for four novel intervention groups (n=30 each group) including pragmatic posterior capsular stretch, Serratus anterior stretch, rotator cuff facilitation and acromioclavicular joint mobilization. Study variables included measurement of Reaching up behind the back (RUBTB), Reaching down behind the neck (RDBTN), and shoulder range of motion (flexion, abduction, external rotation, internal rotation). The paired t-test was used for the change in pretest and posttest variables and the Kruskal Wallis test was used to compare the change in each group of interventions.
resultsAll the variables improved significantly (p< 0.05) from their baseline scores for the interventions. The mean difference among the intervention groups for the variables was statistically significant (p<0.001) on the Kruskal Wallis test. Pragmatic posterior capsular stretch (PPCS) and serratus anterior stretch (SAS) improved the RUBTB and RDBTN more than the other interventions. Rotator cuff facilitation (RFC) improved shoulder rotation more than the rest of the intervention. Acromioclavicular joint mobilization (ACJM) was effective in improving the abduction and flexion ROM.
conclusionPragmatic interventions are effective in improving shoulder ROM in young healthy adults and recommended for the trials on prevention and rehabilitation of shoulder pathologies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.