MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810612798 · doi:10.1093/milmed/usy294

The Effectiveness of an Upper Extremity Neuromuscular Training Program on the Shoulder Function of Military Members With a Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

2018· article· en· W2810612798 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Amanda L. Ager, Jean‐Sébastien Roy, France Gamache, Luc J. Hébert

Bibliographic record

VenueMilitary Medicine · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCanadian Armed ForcesCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation
FundersCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitut de Réadaptation en Déficience Physique de QuébecRéseau Provincial de Recherche en Adaptation-RéadaptationUniversité Laval
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyRotator cuffRandomized controlled trialRehabilitationTendinopathyIsometric exercisePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPopulationRotator cuff injuryDashSurgeryTendon

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Shoulder pain, a leading reason to consult a physician or physiotherapist, continues to be a challenge to rehabilitate, particularly with a military population. A rotator cuff (RC) tendinopathy, the most important source of shoulder pain, is one of the leading reasons for sick leave or a discharge from active military service. Research encourages the use of exercise prescription for the management of a RC tendinopathy, however the ideal method of delivery (group setting versus one-on-one) remains uncertain. The purpose of this single-blind (evaluator) pilot randomized clinical trial was to compare two 6-week rehabilitation programs, a newly developed group-supervised neuromuscular training program and usual one-on-one physiotherapy care, on the pain and symptoms of Canadian soldiers affected by a RC tendinopathy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-one soldiers with the Canadian Armed Forces were randomly assigned to (1) a group-supervised neuromuscular training program (UPEx-NTP) or; (2) one-on-one usual physiotherapy care (UPC). The primary outcome was the Disability of Arm, Hand and Shoulder (DASH) questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) Index, pain levels at rest, and maximum isometric voluntary contractions (MIVC) of the abductors and external (lateral) rotators of the affected shoulder. Both were assessed at baseline (T0), 6 (T6) and 12 (T12) weeks. Analysis included two-way repeated measures of variance for intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analyses. RESULTS: Eighty military members with a RC tendinopathy were contacted, resulting in 31 participants who were randomized for their active intervention, in the UPEx-NTP or UPC, respectively. No significant group (p ≥ 0.16) or group × time interactions (p ≥ 0.11) were found for either ITT or per-protocol analyses. A statistically significant time effect (p < 0.001) was established for the DASH and WORC, showing that both groups improved over time. CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary data demonstrates that both rehabilitation approaches, grounded in active exercises, were not statistically different from each other, and derived similar benefits over time for a military population. This suggests that a group intervention for a RC tendinopathy has potential to be just as effective as a one-on-one approach for a military population, an interesting avenue for an active working population. Larger sample sizes and further investigation are warranted regarding the cost and clinical resource benefits of a supervised group approach.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMilitary MedicineSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207