Observational studyMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2026
Effects of Adding Muscle Energy Technique to Joint Mobilization on Pain, Range of Motion, and Shoulder Function After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: An Observational Cohort Study.
Observational study in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although muscle energy technique (MET) and joint mobilization (JM) are individually used in shoulder rehabilitation, evidence for their combined application following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) remains limited. This study evaluated whether adding MET to JM yields superior outcomes compared with JM in patients after ARCR. MATERIAL AND METHODS Forty patients who underwent ARCR were enrolled in this observational cohort study and assigned to either a control group (n=20) receiving JM or an experimental group (n=20) receiving MET in addition to the same JM. Shoulder function was assessed using the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder rating scale, pain using the visual analog scale (VAS), and joint range of motion using active range of motion (AROM). Assessments were performed at baseline and after 4 weeks. RESULTS Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups (all P>0.05). Both groups improved significantly after the 4-week intervention (all P<0.001). However, the experimental group demonstrated significantly greater gains: lower VAS scores (1.45±0.69 vs 2.35±0.81, P<0.001), greater AROM in all directions (flexion P=0.021; abduction and external rotation both P=0.003; internal rotation P = 0.006), and higher UCLA shoulder rating scale scores (23.15±2.03 vs 19.05±2.26, P 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Combined MET and JM significantly improved shoulder AROM, reduced pain, and enhanced shoulder motor function compared with JM in patients after ARCR.
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.