Volume: 43 Issue: Supplementary 1
Year: 2023, Page: 26-29, Doi: https://doi.org/10.51248/.v43i1.2566
Introduction and Aim: Muscle Energy Technique (MET) is a type of manual treatment that utilises the energy of the muscle in the form of a mild isometric contraction to stretch the muscle and relax the muscles through reciprocal or autogenic inhibition. An idiopathic ailment of the shoulder joint known as frozen shoulder is characterised by a rapid onset of shoulder discomfort and a limitation in mobility. Much research has been conducted to determine how various manual approaches affect shoulder discomfort. This study focuses on how MET affects pain and range of motion during the initial stages of rehabilitation.
Materials and Methods: Patients who are diagnosed with frozen shoulders with fulfilling the inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected for the study. In the current study, thirty patients who had a prevalence of musculoskeletal complications of the frozen shoulder were selected. Out of which eighteen are male and twelve are female. To identify the prevalence each patient's range of motion and VAS Score for pain sensation were recorded. The same patients have been introduced to MET for another seven days. MET includes 5 repetitions/sets, 3 sets/session, and 1 session/day. A statistical test was performed to identify the significant difference between pre and post-values.
Results: Most of the patients had an average range of motion (Flexion) (of 132±18.96), range of motion (Abduction) of (107.00±12.77), range of motion (Rotation) of (63.50±9.39) and VAS score was (5.96±1.29). Most patients showed the improvement in range of motion and a decrease in pain sensation as per the VAS Score.
Conclusion: This study shows that MET effectively improves the range of motion and functional ability, relieving pain in Frozen Shoulder patients in the early stage of rehabilitation.
Keywords: MET; range of motion; pain; frozen shoulder; VAS
1.Chamber, A. F. W., Carr, A. J. Aspects of current management, The role of surgery in frozen shoulder. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery.2003;85-B: 789-795.
2. Jason, J. I., Sundaram, G.S. Subramani, V.M. Physiotherapy intervention for adhesive capsulitis of shoulder, International Journal of Physiotherapy and Research, 2015, Vol.3 (6) page no 1318-1325.
3. Harrast, M. A., Rao, A.G. The stiff shoulder. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2004; 15:557-573.
4. Bridgeman, J.F. Periarthritis of the shoulder and diabetes mellitus. Ann Rheum Dis. 1972; 31: 69-71.
5. Kisner, C., Colby, L.A. Therapeutic Exercise Foundation and Techniques, 6th edition, New Delhi, India: Jaypee Brothers, 2012.
6. Brontzman, S., Wilk, K. Clinical Orthopedics rehabilitation; 2003,227-231.
7. Faqin, A.I., Bedkar, N., Shyam, A., Sancheti, P. Effects of MET on pain, ROM and function in patients with post-surgical elbow stiffness. A randomized control trial; Hong Kong Physiotherapy Journal. 2019; 25-33.
8. Fryer, G., Ruszkowski, W. The influence of Contraction duration in MET applied to the atlantoaxial joint, Int. Journal Osteopath Med. 2004;7(2):79-84.
9. Ylinen, J. Stretching Therapy- For sports and manual therapies. Section-I- stretching theory 1st ed Oxford, united kingdom, Churchill Livingstone, 2008; 22-102.
10. Macdermid, J.C., Vincent, J. I., Kieffer, L., Kieffer, A., Demaiter, J., Macintosh,S. et al., A survey of practice patterns for rehabilitation post elbow fracture. Open Orthop J. 2012;6:429-439.
11. Prince, D. D., McGrath, P.A., Raffi, A., Buckingham, B. The validation of visual analog scales as ratio scales measures for chronic and experimental Pain. Pain. 1983; 17: 45-56.
12. Carlsson, A. M. Assessment of pain. I. Aspects of the reliability and validity of the visual analog scale. Pain. 1983; 16: 87-101.
13. Breivik, H., Borchgrevink, P.C., Allen, S.M., Rosseland, L.A., Romundstad, L., Hals, E. K. B., et al., Assessment of pain. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2008;101(1): 17-24.
14. Chapleau, J., Canet, F., Petit, Y., Laflamme, G.Y., Rouleau, D.M. Validity of goniometric elbow measurements: Comparative study with a radiography method. Clin Orthop. Relat Res. 2011;469(11):3134-3140.
15. Chaitow, L. Muscle Energy Techniques. 4th ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone 2013:94, 243,245,249,250.
16. Fryer, G. Muscle energy technique: An evidence informed approach. Int J Osteopath Med. 2011;14(1):3-9.
17. Schleip, R. Fascial plasticity – A new neurobiological explanation. Part 2. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2003;7:104-116.
18. Phadke, A., Bedekar, N, Shyam, A., Sancheti, P. Effect of muscle energy technique and static stretching on pain and functional disability in patients with mechanical neck pain: A randomized controlled trial. Hong Kong J Physiotherapy. 2016;35:5-11.
Deepak Kumar Mallick, Sohini Paul, Tirthankar Ghosh. Effects of muscle energy technique on improving the range of motion and pain in patients with frozen shoulder. Biomedicine: 2023; 43(1) Supplementary issue: 26-29