EFFECTS OF INHIBITION COMPRESSION VERSUS SCAPULAR MOBILIZATION TECHNIQUE ON SHOULDER IN PATIENTS WITH MASTECTOMY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Breast cancer is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer among women worldwide, and mastectomy remains a critical surgical intervention in its management. Postoperative complications such as rotator cuff dysfunction, pain, and limited upper limb range of motion affect 17–51% of breast cancer survivors, often impairing their ability to perform daily tasks. Physical rehabilitation techniques have shown promise in addressing these impairments, particularly in restoring functional mobility and enhancing the quality of life. Objective: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of inhibition compression therapy and scapular mobilization in improving shoulder function, range of motion (ROM), and pain outcomes in patients following mastectomy. Methods: A randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted over six months at the Gujranwala Institute of Nuclear Medicine. A total of 48 female patients post-modified radical mastectomy were recruited using non-probability convenience sampling and randomly assigned to Group A (inhibition compression, n=24) or Group B (scapular mobilization, n=24). Outcome measures included the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), Constant-Murley Shoulder Outcome Score, and goniometric assessments for flexion, abduction, and external rotation. Data were analyzed using SPSS v25, with a significance level set at p ≤ 0.05. Results: Both groups showed statistically significant improvements (p < 0.001) in SPADI scores and Constant-Murley scores. Group A showed improvements in flexion from 90.1° to 140.4°, abduction from 80.2° to 135.3°, and external rotation from 40.1° to 78.3°. Group B improved from 92.5° to 128.3° (flexion), 85.0° to 125.7° (abduction), and 43.7° to 70.2° (external rotation). Conclusion: Scapular mobilization and inhibition compression therapies both effectively reduced pain and improved shoulder ROM following mastectomy. However, inhibition compression yielded greater gains in functional outcomes, highlighting its value in postmastectomy rehabilitation programs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".