An overview of effective and potential new conservative interventions in patients with frozen shoulder.

Frozen shoulder (FS) is a pathology that is difficult to understand and difficult to manage. Over the last ten years, contradictory and new evidence is provided regarding the recovery and its natural course. This narrative review provides new information about the diagnosis and conservative treatment of patients with FS and ongoing research hypotheses that might provide new insights in the pathology and treatment options. FS has a characteristic course. People with Diabetes Mellitus and thyroid disorders have a higher risk of developing a FS. The diagnosis FS is based on pattern recognition and physical examination. Additionally, 'rule-in' and 'rule-out' criteria can be used to increase the likelihood of the frozen shoulder diagnosis. Recommended and most common physical therapy interventions are mobilization techniques and exercises, in which tissue irritability can guide its intensity. In addition, physical therapy is often complementary with patient education and pharmacotherapy. The latest evidence-based practice related to FS is proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation and mirror therapy. In addition, interventions like pain neuroscience education, high-intensity interval training and lifestyle changes are still hypothetical. Finally, better insight in the involvement of biochemical processes, function of myofibroblasts and matrix metalloproteinases can provide better understanding in the pathophysiology and will be addressed in current review.

Interrater agreement and reliability of clinical tests for assessment of patients with shoulder pain in primary care.

Background: There is limited information about the agreement and reliability of clinical shoulder tests. Objectives: To assess the interrater agreement and reliability of clinical shoulder tests in patients with shoulder pain treated in primary care. Methods: Patients with a primary report of shoulder pain underwent a set of 21 clinical shoulder tests twice on the same day, by pairs of independent physical therapists. The outcome parameters were observed and specific interrater agreement for positive and negative scores, and interrater reliability (Cohen's kappa (κ)). Positive and negative interrater agreement values of ≥0.75 were regarded as sufficient for clinical use. For Cohen's κ, the following classification was used: <0.20 poor, 0.21-0.40 fair, 0.41-0.60 moderate, 0.61-0.80 good, 0.81-1.00 very good reliability. Participating clinics were randomized in two groups; with or without a brief practical session on how to conduct the tests. Results: A total of 113 patients were assessed in 12 physical therapy practices by 36 physical therapists. Positive and negative interrater agreement values were both sufficient for 1 test (the Full Can Test), neither sufficient for 5 tests, and only sufficient for either positive or negative agreement for 15 tests. Interrater reliability was fair for 11 tests, moderate for 9 tests, and good for 1 test (the Full Can Test). An additional brief practical session did not result in better agreement or reliability. Conclusion: Clinicians should be aware that interrater agreement and reliability for most shoulder tests is questionable and their value in clinical practice limited.