Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain, Hemiplegia, Physical Therapy, High Intensity Laser
Conditions
Brief summary
Background: Hemiplegic shoulder pain is one of the most common complications after a stroke. There are many treatment strategies for this complication. High-intensity laser therapy (HILT) is a new treatment option, and we aimed to compare the effectiveness of conventional electrotherapy agents and HILT in this study. Patients and methods: Participants (N = 42) were randomized into the HILT (n = 21) and TENS+US (n = 21) groups. Group 1 received 3 sessions of HILT per week for 3 weeks in addition to a therapeutic exercise program that performed 5 sessions per week for 3 weeks. Group 2 received conventional physical therapy and a therapeutic exercise program for HSP of 5 sessions per week for 3 weeks. Patients were assessed before and after treatment on the on the 6th week for radiological evaluation with ultrasonography and for clinical parameters with VAS, AMAT, MRS, and FIQ scores.
Interventions
DEVICEhigh intensity laser
3 times per week, for 9 sessions
DEVICEtens+us
5 times per week, total 15 sessions for 3 weeks
Sponsors
Ankara City Hospital Bilkent
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Subject)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Diagnosed case of HSP, * Age ≥18, * First-ever unilateral stroke, * Visual analog scale (VAS) ≥30 mm, * Time since stroke ≥6 months, * Time since last local intervention treatment \>6 months.
Exclusion criteria
* A history of shoulder pain prior to stroke; * An unstable medical condition or uncontrolled systemic diseases (such as respiratory failure, congestive heart failure, liver and kidney dysfunction, or any other disorders affecting neuromuscular function); * Bilateral hemiplegia; * Cardiac pacemakers; * Disturbance of awareness, severe visual and cognitive impairment, Mini-Mental State Examination score: \<23 points
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| visual analog scale | before treatment(baseline), after treatment | pain level, between 0-10, 0 is no pain, 10 is very severe pain |
| arm motor ability test | before treatment(baseline), after treatment | this scale asses the upper extremity motor function improvement and daily living activity level , between 0 is the worst score, mean is cant do/use, 5 is the best score.(between 0-5) |
| functional indepandance measures | before treatment(baseline), after treatment | functional capacity assessment scale;and despite indepandance of daily living activity 0-126, high score is better function |
| modified ranking scale | before treatment(baseline), after treatment | determines the patient's addiction level and evaluates disability; the score is between 0 and 6, where 0 is complete well-being, 5 is very severe disorder and 6 is full dependency |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| ultrasonographic imaging | before treatment(baseline), after treatment | muscle-skeletal ultrasonographic imaging;ultrasonographic findings; SA-SD bursitis, Bicipital tenosynovitis, Tendinosis, Cortical irregularity, Partial rupture, Total rupture, ACJ joint hypertrophy, Calcific tendinitis. |
Countries
Turkey (Türkiye)
Outcome results
None listed