The objective of
the study was to evaluate the results of different treatment
modalities of frozen shoulder syndrome (FSS) or adhesive
capsulitis (AC) in a series of 30 cases over a period
of 18 months.
Fifty cases of painful stiff shoulders
were selected for the study and evaluated for the cause
of stiffness and pain. Cases with identifiable aetiology
e.g.; calcific tendinitis, rotator cuff tear, etc. were
grouped separately from those where no specific cause
was identifiable. The latter category of cases of idiopathic
aetiology were included in the final study as cases of
frozen shoulder syndrome (FSS) or adhesive capsulitis
(AC). The number of cases in this category were thirty.
Diagnosis of AC was made by examination
under anaesthesia, i.e., by demonstrating passive restriction
of shoulder movements (global restriction or more specifically
restriction of external rotation ). Surgery / arthroscopy
as treatment modality or arthrography / arthroscopy as
a diagnostic tool was not included as these are not a
routine in practice.
This is a prospective study of 30 cases
of FSS over a period of 18 months, the purpose being to
evaluate the results of three different modalities of
treatment of frozen shoulder syndrome viz; physiotherapy,
manipulation and arthroscopic release. Data was recorded
on a proforma noting personal and medical / surgical history
and the pre and post treatment range of movement (ROM)
chart. Each case of FSS was allotted a treatment programme
according to the duration of symptoms and stage of the
disease and the outcomes compared.
Observation and Results
I . Study population
|
|
| The distribution of 30 cases
was |
|
| Age groups |
30 - 65 years |
| Minimum duration of symptoms |
3 months |
| Male : female |
12 : 18 |
| Dominant arm affected |
22 cases (73 % ) |
| Known diabetics |
13 cases (43 % ) |
| Known IHD |
6 cases ( 21 % ) |
| Major occupation |
Officework / Household |
History of immobilization
(Colles’ fracture ) |
4 cases |
| |
|
| II . Case assessment |
|
| The cases were divided into groups according to
the stage of the disease |
|
| Group A : In stage I (pain > stiffness ) : |
12 |
| Group B : In stage I (stiffness > pain ) : |
16 |
| Group C : In stage III (residual
pain / stiffness) |
02 |
| Total : |
30 |
| |
|
| III . Treatment plan |
|
| Each group was allotted a treatment plan as per
the stage of the disease : |
|
| Group A NSAIDs |
Physiotherapy |
| Group B MUA |
Physiotherapy |
| Group C Arthroscopic release |
Physiotherapy |
Group A treatment protocol
Pain control with suitable NSAIDs and
gradual physiotherapy starting from passive to active
assisted ROM exercises. Of the 12 cases, 7 regained painfree
ROM in a period of 2 weeks and rest 5 did not show significant
improvement in ROM though the pain subsided by 3rd week.
The five cases showing no improvement were shifted to
treatment plan as for Group B.
Group B treatment protocol
Cases in stage II were subjected to manipulation
under anaesthesia (MUA) with steroid injection. Elderly
patients were evaluated for fitness for general anaesthesia
and shoulder roentgenograms and consent obtained before
manipulation. Global restriction of passive ROM was confirmed
under anaesthesia before manipulation. The arm was gently
abducted upto maximum 90 degrees and externally rotated
upto maximum 45 degrees, and a mixture of 3 ml methlyprednisolone
acetate (Depo -Medrol) and 2 ml bupivacaine (Sensorcaine
0.5 %) injected in the subacromial space. The arm was
kept in abducted and externally rotated position. Adequate
pain control was achieved by parenteral analgesics and
supervised physiotherapy programme begun same evening
, once post procedure roentgenograms were reported normal.
Of the 21 cases (added 5 from Group A),
17 showed significant improvement in ROM and pain and
returned to their daily activities at the end of 2 weeks
of supervised physiotherapy. Four cases that did not show
improvement opted for a second MUA at the end of 4 weeks
and 3 of these regained useful painfree ROM by 3rd week
of physiotherapy. One case of persistent stiffness was
shifted to Group C treatment protocol.
Group C treatment protocol
Cases of residual stiffness and pain
were planned for a arthroscopic release. Of the three
cases (one from Group B ) two were unfit for the procedure
and had poor compliance for physiotherapy because of neurological
disease (one Parkinson’s disease and other multi-infarct
state ). One case underwent arthroscopic procedure with
complete release of all intra-articular adhesions especially
the coraco-humeral ligament. There was significant improvement
in the ROM with 2 weeks of supervised physiotherapy programme.
IV . Evaluation of outcomes
Each group showed good response to the
planned treatment protocol. Of the 12 cases from group
A, 7 cases (58 % ) showed significant painfree ROM with
NSAIDs and physiotherapy alone.
The remaining 5 opted for MUA like the
Group B cases. Of the 21 cases of MUA, 17 cases (80 %
) regained useful ROM with first manipulation. The only
case of Group C subjected to arthroscopic release showed
good improvement in ROM and return to independent daily
activities.
To conclude, staged treatment and proper
selection of cases of adhesive capsulitis gives optimum
results.

|
 |
 |
Fig. 1 : Natural course of frozen shoulder syndrome. |
Fig. 2 : Course of the disease with staged treatment. |
|