Efficacy of mobilization with movement (MWM) for shoulder conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

References

• Urwin M, Symmons D, Allison T, et al. Estimating the burden of musculoskeletal disorders in the community: the comparative prevalence of symptoms at different anatomical sites, and the relation to social deprivation. Ann Rheum Dis. 1998 Nov;57(11):649–655. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luime JJ, Koes BW, Hendriksen IJM, et al. Prevalence and incidence of shoulder pain in the general population; a systematic review. Scand J Rheumatol. 2004;33(2):73–81. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Littlewood C, Bateman M, Connor C, et al. Physiotherapists’ recommendations for examination and treatment of rotator cuff related shoulder pain: a consensus exercise. Physiother Pract Res. 2019;40(2):87–94. .
   Google Scholar
• NICE guidelines ‘Management of shoulder pain’ 2017. [accessed 2021 Mar 01]. Available from: https://cks.nice.org.uk/topics/shoulder-pain/management/initial-management/#initial-management.
   Google Scholar
• sitecore\[email protected]. Subacromial Shoulder Pain - Commissioning Guide [Internet]. Royal College of Surgeons. [accessed 2021 Mar 01]. Available from: https://www.rcseng.ac.uk/library-and-publications/rcs-publications/docs/subacromial-shoulder-pain/
   Google Scholar
• Pieters L, Lewis J, Kuppens K, et al. An update of systematic reviews examining the effectiveness of conservative physical therapy interventions for subacromial shoulder pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2020 Mar;50(3):131–141. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Littlewood C, May S, Walters S. A review of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of conservative interventions for rotator cuff tendinopathy. Shoulder Elbow. 2013;5(3):151–167.
   Google Scholar
• Cliona JM, Hill JC, Hay EM, et al. Identifying potential moderators of first-line treatment effect in patients with musculoskeletal shoulder pain: a systematic review. Eur J Physiother. 2020;1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lowe CM, Barrett E, McCreesh K, et al. Clinical effectiveness of non-surgical interventions for primary frozen shoulder: a systematic review. J Rehabil Med. 2019;51(8):539–556.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lirio Romero C, Torres Lacomba M, Castilla Montoro Y, et al. Mobilization with movement for shoulder dysfunction in older adults: a pilot trial. J Chiropr Med. 2015;14(4):249–258. .
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doner G, Guven Z, Atalay A, et al. Evalution of Mulligan’s technique for adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. J Rehabil Med. 2013 Jan;45(1):87–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delgado-Gil JA, Prado-Robles E, Rodrigues-de-Souza DP, et al. Effects of mobilization with movement on pain and range of motion in patients with unilateral shoulder impingement syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2015;38(4):245–252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hing W, Hall T, Mulligan B. The Mulligan Concept of Manual Therapy. 2nd ed. 2019. Chatswood, Australia: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Stathopoulos N, Dimitriadis Z, Koumantakis GA. Effectiveness of Mulligan’s mobilization with movement techniques on range of motion in peripheral joint pathologies: a systematic review with meta-analysis between 2008 and 2018. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2019;42(6):439–449.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westad K, Tjoestolvsen F, Hebron C. The effectiveness of Mulligan’s mobilisation with movement (MWM) on peripheral joints in musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions: a systematic review. Musculoskeletal Sci Pract. 2019;39:157–163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varghese MV, George J. Effectiveness of Mulligans mobilisation with movement on shoulder dysfunction: a systematic review. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2020;14(10):1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019;366:l4898.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GRADE handbook [Internet]. [cited 2021 Mar 15]. Available from: https://gdt.gradepro.org/app/handbook/handbook.html
   Google Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: Academic Press; 2013. p. 459.
   Google Scholar
• Arshad HS, Shah IH, Nasir RH. Comparison of Mulligan mobilization with movement and end-range mobilization following Maitland techniques in patients with frozen shoulder in improving range of motion. International Journal of Science and Research. 2013;4(4):7.
   Google Scholar
• Boruah L, Dutta A, Deka P, et al. To study the effect of scapular mobilization versus mobilization with movement to reduce pain and improve gleno-humeral range of motion in adhesive capsulitis of shoulder: a comparative study. Int J Physiother. 2015;2(5). DOI:https://doi.org/10.15621/ijphy/2015/v2i5/78239
   Google Scholar
• Dilip JR. Effect of Gong’s mobilization versus Mulligan’s mobilization on shoulder pain and shoulder medial rotation mobility in frozen shoulder. Int J Physiother. 2016;3(1). DOI:https://doi.org/10.15621/ijphy/2016/v3i1/88928
   Google Scholar
• Djordjevic OC, Vukicevic D, Katunac L, et al. Mobilization with movement and kinesiotaping compared with a supervised exercise program for painful shoulder: results of a clinical trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2012 Jul;35(6):454–463.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goyal R, Jindal P, Khurana G. A comparison of granisetron and nitroglycerine for attenuating rocuronium pain: a double-blinded randomized, placebo controlled trial. Saudi J Anaesth. 2014;8(1):83‐87.
   Google Scholar
• Guimarães JF, Salvini TF, Siqueira ALJ, et al. Effects of mobilization with movement vs Sham technique on range of motion, strength, and function in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome: randomized clinical trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2016;39(9):605–615.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haider R, Bashir MS, Adeel M, et al. Comparison of conservative exercise therapy with and without Maitland Thoracic Manipulative therapy in patients with subacromial pain: clinical trial. J Pak Med Assoc. 2018;68(3):381–387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kachingwe AF, Phillips B, Sletten E, et al. Comparison of manual therapy techniques with therapeutic exercise in the treatment of shoulder impingement: a randomized controlled pilot clinical trial. J Man Manip Ther. 2008;16(4):238–247.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Khyathi P, Babu KV, Kumar NSDA. Comparative effect of spencer technique versus mulligans technique for subjects with frozen shoulder a single blind study. Int J Physiother. 2015;2(2):448–458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menek B, Tarakci D, Algun ZC. The effect of Mulligan mobilization on pain and life quality of patients with Rotator cuff syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2019;32(1):171–178.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Minerva RK, Alagingi NK, Apparao P. To Compare the effectiveness of Maitland versus Mulligan mobilisation in idiopathic adhesive capsulitis of shoulder. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). 2016;2:9.
   Google Scholar
• Neelapala YVR, Reddy YRS, Danait R. Effect of Mulligan’s posterolateral glide on shoulder rotator strength, scapular upward rotation in shoulder pain subjects - a randomized controlled trial. J Musculoskeletal Res. 2016;19(3):1. .
   Google Scholar
• Ranjana SP, Banerjee D, Bhushan V, et al. Long term efficacy of Maitland mobilization versus Mulligan mobilization in idiopathic adhesive capsulitis of shoulder: a randomized controlled trial. Indian J Physiother Occup Ther. 2016;10(4):91–97.
   Google Scholar
• Rathod D, Priyanka G, Palkar A. Comparative study of Kaltenborn mobilisation versus Mulligan mobilisation in patients with frozen shoulder. Int J Health Sci (Qassim). 2019;9(9):320–324.
   Google Scholar
• Sai KV, Kumar JNS. Effects of Mulligan’s mobilisation with movement on pain and range of motion in diabetic frozen shoulder a randomized clinical trail. Indian J Physiother Occup Ther. 2015;9(4):187–193.
   Google Scholar
• Satpute KH, Bhandari P, Hall T. Efficacy of hand behind back mobilization with movement for acute shoulder pain and movement impairment: a randomized controlled trial. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2015;38(5):324–334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shrivastava A, Shyam AK, Sabnis S, et al. Randomised controlled study of Mulligan’s Vs. Maitland’s mobilization technique in adhesive capsulitis of shoulder joint. Indian J Physiother Occup Ther. 2011;5(4):12–15.
   Google Scholar
• Srivastava N, Joshi S. Comparision between the Effectiveness of Mobilization with Movement and End Range Mobilization along with Conventional Therapy for Management of Frozen Shoulder. Indian J Physiother Occup Ther. 2017;11(4):176‐179.
   Google Scholar
• Subhash R, Makhija M. Effectiveness of mobilization with movement in weight bearing position on pain, shoulder range of motion and function in patients with shoulder dysfunction. Indian J Public Health Res Dev. 2020;11(6):912‐916.
   Google Scholar
• Teys P, Bisset L, Vicenzino B. The initial effects of a Mulligan’s mobilization with movement technique on range of movement and pressure pain threshold in pain-limited shoulders. Man Ther. 2008;13(1):37–42.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Yeole U, DrP D, Gharote G, et al. Effectiveness of movement with mobilization in adhesive capsulitis of shoulder: randomized controlled trial. Indian Journal of Medical Research and Pharmaceutical Sciences. 2017;4(2):1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Youssef AR, Ibrahim AMA, Ayad KE. Mulligan mobilization is more effective in treating diabetic frozen shoulder than the Maitland technique. Int J Physiother. 2015;804–810.
   Google Scholar
• Mullaney MJ, McHugh MP, Johnson CP, et al. Reliability of shoulder range of motion comparing a goniometer to a digital level. Physiother Theory Pract. 2010;26(5):327–333.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bialosky J, Beneciuk J, Bishop M, et al. Unraveling the mechanisms of manual therapy: modeling an approach. Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy. 2018;48(1):8–18.
   Google Scholar
• Higgins JPT, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, et al. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003 Sep 6;327(7414):557–560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stathopoulos N, Dimitriadis Z, Koumantakis GA. Effectiveness of Mulligan’s mobilization with movement techniques on pain and disability of peripheral joints: a systematic review with meta-analysis between 2008-2017. Physiotherapy. 2019;105(1):1–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vicenzino B, Hing W, Rivett D, et al. Mobilisation with Movement The Art and the Science. 1st ed. 2011. Chatswood, Australia: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Lehman GJ. The role and value of symptom-modification approaches in musculoskeletal practice. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2018;48(6):430–435.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Satpute K, Hall T, Bisen R, et al. The effect of spinal mobilization with leg movement in patients with lumbar radiculopathy-a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100(5):828–836.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen AP, Pitance L, Mahaudens P, et al. Effects of Mulligan mobilization with movement in subacute lateral ankle sprains: a pragmatic randomized trial. J Man Manip Ther. 2021;1–12. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10669817.2021.1889165
   Google Scholar
• Zeppieri Jr G, Bialosky J, George SZ. Importance of outcome domain for patients with musculoskeletal pain: characterizing subgroups and their response to treatment. Phys Ther. 2020;100(5):829–845.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartolucci AA, Hillegass WB. Overview, Strengths, and Limitations of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. In: Chiappelli F, editor. Evidence-Based Practice: toward Optimizing Clinical Outcomes. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2010; 251–252.
   Google Scholar