Frozen shoulder, a debilitating condition affecting shoulder movement and causing significant pain, has long been a challenge for medical professionals. In a recent study, researchers compared the effectiveness of two treatment options: multisite injection and arthroscopic capsular release. The findings suggest that both approaches are effective, but multisite injection may be a simpler, more cost-effective alternative, making it a promising primary choice before considering surgery. This research highlights the ongoing efforts to improve the management of shoulder issues and provide better outcomes for patients.
Unraveling the Mystery of Frozen Shoulder
Frozen shoulder, also known as adhesive capsulitis, is a common musculoskeletal problem that affects the shoulder joint. It is characterized by spontaneous shoulder pain and a progressive loss of joint movement, particularly in forward flexion, abduction, and external rotation. This condition typically targets individuals in their fourth and sixth decades of life and can be particularly challenging to treat.
Comparing Treatment Approaches
In this retrospective study, researchers set out to compare the effectiveness of two treatment options: multisite injection and arthroscopic capsular release. The study involved 80 patients with unilateral frozen shoulder, divided into two equal groups based on their chosen treatment.
The multisite injection group received a combination of lidocaine and triamcinolone acetonide injected into three key areas: the biceps long head, the posteroinferior capsule, and the coracohumeral ligament. Patients in this group could receive up to two injections if needed.
The arthroscopic capsular release group underwent a surgical procedure where the contracted rotator interval and anterior capsule were selectively released. Both groups underwent the same physiotherapy regime after their respective treatments.
Promising Results for Both Approaches
The researchers found that both treatments resulted in significant improvements in pain, range of motion, and functional scores, such as the Disability of Arm, Hand, and Shoulder (DASH) score and the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS). At the 6-month follow-up, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of these outcome measures.
Interestingly, the researchers noted that the arthroscopic capsular release group had slightly better internal and external rotation at the 1-month mark, but this difference disappeared by the 6-month follow-up. This suggests that the multisite injection approach may be a viable alternative, offering a simpler and more cost-effective solution for patients.
Navigating Diabetic Challenges
The study also examined the outcomes of patients with diabetes, a population that is known to have a higher incidence of frozen shoulder and often experiences more severe and persistent symptoms. Surprisingly, the researchers found no significant differences in outcomes between diabetic and non-diabetic patients, indicating that diabetes may not be a contraindication for these treatment approaches.
Optimizing Treatment Strategies
The findings of this study highlight the ongoing efforts to improve the management of frozen shoulder. By comparing the effectiveness of multisite injection and arthroscopic capsular release, the researchers have provided valuable insights that can guide clinicians in their decision-making process.
The key takeaways from this study are:
– Both multisite injection and arthroscopic capsular release are effective treatments for frozen shoulder, with similar long-term outcomes.
– Multisite injection may be a simpler, more cost-effective primary option before considering surgical treatment.
– Diabetes does not appear to be a contraindication for these treatment approaches, suggesting that patients with this condition can also benefit from these interventions.
As the understanding of frozen shoulder continues to evolve, this research contributes to the growing body of knowledge and offers new perspectives on the management of this challenging shoulder condition.
Author credit: This article is based on research by Min Li, Zhen Xu, Jiqun Shi, Mengru Zhang, Keer Qiang, Ke Lv, Qinyi Wu, Xiaoyi Pang, Yu Zhao, Jianda Xu.
For More Related Articles Click Here
