Abstract
-
Frozen shoulder, a common and debilitating shoulder complaint, has been the subject of uncertainty within the scientific literature and clinical practice.
-
We performed an electronic PubMed search on all (1559) articles mentioning ‘frozen shoulder’ or ‘adhesive capsulitis’ to understand and qualify the range of naming, classification and natural history of the disease. We identified and reviewed six key thought leadership papers published in the past 10 years and all (24) systematic reviews published on frozen shoulder or adhesive capsulitis in the past five years.
-
This revealed that, while key thought leaders such as the ISAKOS Upper Extremity Council are unequivocal that ‘adhesive capsulitis’ is an inappropriate term, the long-term and short-term trends showed the literature (63% of systematic reviews assessed) preferred ‘adhesive capsulitis’.
-
The literature was divided as to whether or not to classify the complaint as primary only (9 of 24) or primary and secondary (9 of 24); six did not touch on classification.
-
Furthermore, despite a systematic review in 2016 showing no evidence to support a three-phase self-limiting progression of frozen shoulder, 11 of 12 (92%) systematic reviews that mentioned phasing described a three-phase progression. Eight (33%) described it as ‘self-limiting’, three (13%) described it as self-limiting in ‘nearly all’ or ‘most’ cases, and six (25%) stated that it was not self-limiting; seven (29%) did not touch on disease resolution.
-
We call for a data and patient-oriented approach to the classification and description of the natural history of the disease, and recommend authors and clinicians (1) use the term ‘frozen shoulder’ over ‘adhesive capsulitis’, (2) use an updated definition of the disease which recognizes the often severe pain suffered, and (3) avoid the confusing and potentially harmful repetition of the natural history of the disease as a three-phase, self-limiting condition.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:273-279.DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190032
Introduction
Frozen shoulder, despite being a common and debilitating complaint, is a subject of considerable uncertainty both within scientific literature and clinical practice. Even its name is a topic of serious contention in the medical profession; across papers published over the past 70 years, alternative names put forward or utilized in leading journals have included ‘adhesive capsulitis’, 1 ‘fibrotic capsulitis’, 2 ‘primary idiopathic stiff shoulder’, 3 and ‘contracture of the shoulder’. 4 These terms have all been applied to the painful, debilitating contraction of the shoulder 5 which has been the subject of many attempts at definition. Most of these attempts do not deviate far from that given by Codman in 1934, 6 usefully provided in updated terminology by Bunker in 2009:
-
‘This is a condition which comes on slowly with pain over the deltoid insertion, inability to sleep, painful incomplete elevation and external rotation, the restriction of movement being both active and passive, with a normal radiograph, the pain being very trying and yet all patients are able to continue their daily habits and routines.’ 4
There have been very few notable improvements on Codman’s definition. For example, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) in their 2011 consensus paper provided the following definition, agreed by 82% of the 190 member clinicians who responded:
-
‘Frozen shoulder is a condition characterized by functional restriction of both active and passive shoulder motion for which radiographs of the glenohumeral joint are essentially unremarkable except for the possible presence of osteopenia or calcific tendonitis’ 7
While the ASES definition provides a simple, understandable definition for clinicians and patients, it does not mention pain at all; a very serious aspect of the disease particularly from a patient perspective.
Despite this inconsistency in definitions, the literature is at least relatively uniform in the description of the symptoms (insidious sleep-disturbing pain and stiffness, 8–13 thickening of ligaments, 14–16 contraction of the joint and reduced articular volume, 2,17,18 or healing-associated biological reactions 2,3,18 ) and diagnosis (presence of the above symptoms in the face of a normal radiograph). 2,3,6 Although assessment of symptoms is fairly consistent, consensus quickly breaks down when it comes to the naming, classification and natural history of the disorder. This is a serious concern, and one that we believe negatively impacts understanding of this relatively prevalent disorder and research into improving that understanding, communication to patients of what they can expect, and – most importantly – the clinical treatment they receive.
We aim, through analysis of the available literature, to assess how the medical and scientific community understands frozen shoulder, identify inconsistencies, and inform clinicians and researchers as to how best to describe the condition to patients and in the literature.
Material and methods
To illustrate the uncertainty within the profession with respect to naming, classification and natural history, we analysed the literature in detail, including a meta-assessment of all articles on PubMed that have mentioned either ‘frozen shoulder’ or ‘adhesive capsulitis’, key thought leadership pieces from the past 10 years, and all systematic reviews published on the topic in the past five years. The six thought leadership articles from the past 10 years were identified through criteria of either consistent citation by journals, particular scientific importance and validity of content or being a consensus paper published by an august body. Thirty-nine systematic reviews published on PubMed with mentions of ‘frozen shoulder’ or ‘adhesive capsulitis’ in the past five years (since 2014) were identified. Of these, 15 were excluded after full-text revision due to mentioning the disease only incidentally, leaving 24 for analysis (Fig. 1).
Inclusion criteria for review of thought leadership and systematic reviews.
Citation: EFORT Open Reviews 5, 5; 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190032
Nomenclature and classification
For some thought leaders, 3,19 including the ISAKOS Upper Extremity Council, the term ‘frozen shoulder’ should only be applied to shoulder stiffness in the absence of an identifiable cause, while any stiffness with a known cause should be termed ‘secondary shoulder stiffness’ (they suggest ‘adhesive capsulitis’ should be discarded because adhesions are not consistently observed). For others, 2,7,17,18 either frozen shoulder or adhesive capsulitis are broader terms which describe onset of the above symptoms whether primary (idiopathic), or secondary (with an identified cause).
Of the 24 systematic reviews analysed, we found that two (8%) used the term ‘frozen shoulder’ exclusively, seven (29%) used ‘adhesive capsulitis’ exclusively, seven (29%) used frozen shoulder predominantly but mentioned adhesive capsulitis, and eight (33%) used adhesive capsulitis predominantly but mentioned frozen shoulder (Fig. 2).
Proportional instances of keywords ‘frozen shoulder’ and/or ‘adhesive capsulitis’ in PubMed.
Citation: EFORT Open Reviews 5, 5; 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190032
When classifying the disorder as either ‘primary only’ or ‘primary and secondary’, nine (37%) of 24 systematic reviews defined it as ‘primary only’, nine (37%) as ‘primary and secondary’ and six (25%) did not touch on classification. In addition to this, sub-categorization can be problematic: in the aforementioned consensus survey of ASES, in which 85% of respondents agreed that ‘frozen shoulder’ should include both primary and secondary types, only 66% agreed with the proposed sub-division of secondary frozen shoulder into ‘extrinsic, intrinsic and systemic’. 7 Elsewhere, authors have described the disorder in the presence of diabetes (a known risk factor) 20,21 as an entirely separate category to primary or secondary. 18
Poor understanding of how a disorder is defined can lead to sub-optimal patient management and hinder research endeavours. Study of the literature itself becomes very difficult. If nomenclature or definition is inconsistent across studies of the disease, then how does one draw conclusions across studies? An understanding or analysis of the prevalence, risk factors and health economics of the disease also becomes difficult, if not impossible. Finally, and most importantly, poor understanding will inevitably have a deleterious effect on treatment of the disease itself; 4 ‘frozen shoulder’ as a term does not give a sense of the severe pain (described as a constant burning) 18 suffered by patients, which is a primary aspect of the disease as described in all 30 systematic reviews assessed (100%). The alternative term, ‘adhesive capsulitis’, suggests the presence of adhesions, something which Neviaser, who coined the term 1 , neither found nor wanted to convey. 19 Use of either of these terms without attendant explanation may lead to confusion for patients, clinicians or both, potentially resulting in incorrect or unnecessary treatment and poor patient outcomes. 4 Additionally, while bodies such as ISAKOS and ASES have published their preference for the term ‘frozen shoulder’, there is a clear discordance with the trends in the literature and in the wider world. For example, at the time of writing, the term ‘frozen shoulder’ on Wikipedia re-directs the reader to the entry for ‘adhesive capsulitis’, 22 which presents to the general public an impression that the latter term is the correct one, despite the entry using the term ‘frozen shoulder’ and ‘adhesive capsulitis’ interchangeably (27 vs. 24 uses respectively).
Natural history
If nomenclature and classification of frozen shoulder has been fraught with disagreement, the natural history of the disorder has suffered much more serious misunderstanding, probably due to the careless propagation of poorly supported conclusions.
Throughout medical journals, text books 23,24 and official documentation of population-wide medical services such as the National Health Service (NHS) in the United Kingdom, 25 advice is given that those who suffer from this disorder should expect to go through three progressive phases of pain, stiffness and gradual recovery, as initially proposed by Reeves in 1975. 26 While all the studies reviewed concur that patients experience both pain and restriction of movement, the timing and extent of these symptoms is a matter of debate. Frozen shoulder is often described as ‘self-limiting’, 27 meaning that recovery will be achieved over time, regardless of treatment approach. Out of the 24 systematic reviews assessed, eight (33%) described frozen shoulder or adhesive capsulitis as ‘self-limiting’ in all cases; three (13%) described it as such in ‘nearly all’ or ‘most’ cases; six (25%), stated that it was not self-limiting or was previously believed to be; and seven (29%) did not mention disease resolution (see Table 1).
Reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses treating frozen shoulder or adhesive capsulitis in the last five years
| Author | Year | Journal | Study design | Disease name used (1st / 2nd) | Definition references | Etiology | Phases | Self-limiting? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kitridis et al 30 | 2019 | Am J Sports Med | Network MA | AC | – | I & II | 3 | Yes |
| Alsubheen et al 8 | 2018 | Arch Phys Med Rehabil | SR | AC / FS | Hsu et al, 2016 (J Diabetes Investig) | I & II | 0 | No |
| Suh et al 33 | 2018 | Eur Radiol | SR + MA | AC / FS | Hsu et al, 2011 (JSES) | I | – | – |
| Yang et al 32 | 2018 | Evid Based Complement Alternat Med | SR + MA* | AC / FS | Tighe and Oakley et al, 2008 (South Med J) | I & II | – | Yes |
| Saltychev et al 31 | 2018 | Scand J Surg | SR + MA | AC | – | – | – | Yes |
| Tran et al 34 | 2018 | Arthitis Care Res (Hoboken) | SR | AC | – | – | – | – |
| Lin et al 35 | 2017 | Arch Phys Med Rehabil | SR + MA | FS / AC | – | I | 3 | Yes |
| Wu et al 36 | 2017 | Sci Rep | SR + MA* | FS / AC | – | – | – | – |
| Wang et al 37 | 2017 | Medicine | MA | AC / FS | Grey et al, 1978 (JBJS Am) | I | 3 | No |
| Catapano et al 38 | 2017 | PM R | SR | AC | Vastamäki et al, 2012 (CORR) | – | 3 | No |
| Prodromidis et al 39 | 2016 | JBJS | SR + MA | FS / AC | – | I & II | – | No, historically yes |
| Eljabu et al 40 | 2016 | Arch Orthop Trauma Surg | SR | FS | Shaffer et al, 1992 (JBJS Am) | I | 3 | Yes |
| Wong et al 29 | 2016 | Physiotherapy | SR | FS / AC | – | I & II | – | No |
| Ryan et al 41 | 2016 | BMC Musculoskelet Disord | SR | FS | Codman et al, 1934 (Ed. Thomas Todd) | I & II | – | – |
| Koh et al 42 | 2016 | Singapore Med J | SR† | AC / FS | Hsu et al, 2011 (JSES), Neviaser et al, 2011 (J Am Acad Orthop Surg), Zuckerman et al, 2011 (JBJS Br) | I & II | 3 | No, historically yes |
| Sun et al 43 | 2017 | AJSM | SR + MA* | FS / AC | Dias et al, 2005 (BMJ), Gam et al, 1998 (Scand J Rheumatol) | – | 3 | Not always |
| Xiao et al 44 | 2016 | Clin J Sport Med | R | AC / FS | – | I & II | 3 | Yes |
| Noten et al 10 | 2016 | Arch Phys Med Rehabil | SR | AC | – | I | 3 | Usually |
| Sun et al 12 | 2016 | Medicine | SR + MA* | AC | – | – | 3 | – |
| Uppal et al 13 | 2015 | World J Orthop | SR | FS | Codman et al, 1934 (Ed. Thomas Todd) | I & II | – | – |
| Lee et al 9 | 2015 | Biomed Res Int | SR† | AC | – | I | – | – |
| Page et al 45 | 2014 | Cochrane Database Syst Rev | R | AC / FS | Codman et al, 1934 (Ed. Thomas Todd), Neviaser et al, 1945 (JBJS), Reeves et al, 1975 (Scand J Rheumatol) | I | – | Usually |
| Page et al 46 | 2014 (b) | Cochrane Database Syst Rev | R | AC / FS | Codman et al, 1934 (Ed. Thomas Todd), Neviaser et al, 1945 (JBJS), Reeves et al, 1975 (Scand J Rheumatol) | I | – | Usually |
| Song et al 47 | 2014 | PM R | R | AC / FS | Tasto et al, 2007 (Sports Med Arhrosc Rev), Neviaser et al, 2011 (J Am Acad Orthop Surg), Hannafin et al, 2000 (Clin Orthop) | I | 3 | Yes |
Note. R, review; SR, systematic review; MA, meta-analysis; AC, adhesive capsulitis; FS, frozen shoulder.
*Of randomized controlled trial.
While various alternatives to the three-phase model have been proposed, including two-phase, 17 four-phase 28 and phaseless 8 descriptions, 11 out of the 12 systematic reviews which mention phasing perpetuate the three-phase model. The remaining systematic review 29 indicated that there was no evidence supporting a phased approach and was the only study where the description was based solely on evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). They showed that there was no objective data published to validate either the theory of spontaneous resolution to normal range of motion, or that of progression through phases of pain, then stiffness, then resolution. The descriptions given in the 11 other systematic reviews relied on low-quality evidence or secondary sources. Despite this, recent articles continue to employ the same poorly supported description of the natural history of frozen shoulder. 30–32
Recommendations
The main causes for confusion surrounding frozen shoulder stem from disagreement on how to name, classify and describe the natural history of the disorder. This appears to be getting worse rather than better, as evidenced by our analysis of terminology on PubMed since it first appeared over 70 years ago. There is, in the literature, a clear lack of scientific measurement of the known aspects of frozen shoulder (insidious sleep-disturbing pain, reduced range of active and passive motion, thickening of ligaments, contraction of the joint and reduced articular volumes, healing-associated biological reactions in spite of a normal radiograph where osteopenia or calcific tendonitis is not present) from onset until resolution, or not. Varying approaches to diagnosis, management techniques, and heterogeneity in the measurement of symptoms makes forming a meaningful consensus on natural history from the current literature extremely challenging or impossible. Currently it is not clear in which scenarios it would be appropriate to classify, sub-classify or re-classify the disease, or whether sub-groups of patients such as those with predisposing conditions like diabetes mellitus should be considered within these classifications at all.
A study applying a more rigorously empirical approach across a large sample and an appropriate time period, paying particular attention to the challenges described above, would lead to a clearer understanding of the natural history and appropriate phasing of the disease, and thus to more informed, measurable and comparable management. It may also become apparent that, in some instances, the terms and phases currently used are not appropriate and that new classifications or definitions are required. Until we have this data-driven model however, we make the following recommendations. Firstly, we add our voice to those of ISAKOS and ASES in encouraging the use of ‘frozen shoulder’ as the preferred term rather than ‘adhesive capsulitis’, as the former has a longer history and the latter incorrectly suggests the presence of adhesions. Secondly, while we commend the ASES definition 7 for its clarity, we suggest an updated version to include reference to the often debilitating pain experienced by patients:
-
‘Primary frozen shoulder is a condition characterized by often severe shoulder pain and functional restriction of both active and passive shoulder motion in which radiographs of the glenohumeral joint are essentially unremarkable’.
Thirdly and finally, we entreat authors and clinicians to avoid repeating the description of the disease as a ‘three-phase, self-limiting condition’. We recommend using rather the best-evidenced natural history available of the disease as one ‘which often sees short-term improvement, but which bears a high chance of ongoing low-level restriction and pain’. 29 This may reduce the considerable confusion currently apparent in the literature and within the profession. More seriously, it may avoid distress and potential harm to the proportion of patients for whom the disease does not follow the predominantly described path to resolution, even when receiving the most appropriate treatment.
Open access
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed.
PH is the Editor in Chief of EFORT Open Reviews.
The other authors declare no conflict of interest relevant to this work.
No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article.
references
- 1.↑
Neviaser JS . Adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder: a study of the pathological findings in periarthritis of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1945;27:211–222 .
- 2.↑
Hsu JE , Anakwenze OA , Warrender WJ , Abboud JA . Current review of adhesive capsulitis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011;20:502–514 .
- 3.↑
Itoi E , Arce G , Bain GI & Diercks RL et al. Shoulder stiffness: current concepts and concerns. Arthroscopy 2016;32:1402–1414 .
- 4.↑
Bunker T . Time for a new name for frozen shoulder—contracture of the shoulder. Shoulder & Elbow 2009;1:4–9 .
- 5.↑
Page P , Labbe A . Adhesive capsulitis: use the evidence to integrate your interventions. N Am J Sports Phys Ther 2010;5:266–273 .
- 6.↑
Codman EA . Tendinitis of the short rotators. In: The shoulder. Boston: T. Todd Company, 1934:216–224 .
- 7.↑
Zuckerman JD , Rokito A . Frozen shoulder: a consensus definition. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011;20:322–325 .
- 8.↑
Alsubheen SA , Nazari G , Bobos P , MacDermid JC , Overend TJ , Faber K . Effectiveness of nonsurgical interventions for managing adhesive capsulitis in patients with diabetes: a systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2019;100:350–365 .
- 9.↑
Lee LC , Lieu FK , Lee HL , Tung TH . Effectiveness of hyaluronic acid administration in treating adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Biomed Res Int 2015;2015:314120 .
- 10.↑
Noten S , Meeus M , Stassijns G , Van Glabbeek F , Verborgt O , Struyf F . Efficacy of different types of mobilization techniques in patients with primary adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder: a systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016;97:815–825 .
- 11.
Page MJ , Green S & Kramer S et al. Manual therapy and exercise for adhesive capsulitis (frozen shoulder). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;2014:CD011275.
- 12.↑
Sun Y , Lu S , Zhang P , Wang Z , Chen J . Steroid injection versus physiotherapy for patients with adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder: a PRIMSA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e3469 .
- 13.↑
Uppal HS , Evans JP , Smith C . Frozen shoulder: a systematic review of therapeutic options. World J Orthop 2015;6:263–268 .
- 14.↑
Hagiwara Y , Ando A , Kanazawa K et al.. Arthroscopic coracohumeral ligament release for patients with frozen shoulder. Arthrosc Tech 2017;7:e1–e5 .
- 15.
Chi AS , Kim J , Long SS , Morrison WB , Zoga AC . Non-contrast MRI diagnosis of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. Clin Imaging 2017;44:46–50 .
- 16.↑
Li JQ , Tang KL & Wang J et al. MRI findings for frozen shoulder evaluation: is the thickness of the coracohumeral ligament a valuable diagnostic tool? PLoS One 2011;6:e28704 .
- 17.↑
Lewis J . Frozen shoulder contracture syndrome: aetiology, diagnosis and management. Man Ther 2015;20:2–9 .
- 18.↑
Robinson CM , Seah KT , Chee YH , Hindle P , Murray IR . Frozen shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012;94:1–9 .
- 19.↑
Bunker T . Time for a new name for ‘frozen shoulder’. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1985;290:1233–1234 .
- 20.↑
Cho CH , Kim DH , Lee YK . Serial comparison of clinical outcomes after arthroscopic capsular release for refractory frozen shoulder with and without diabetes. Arthroscopy 2016;32:1515–1520 .
- 21.↑
Bridgman JF . Periarthritis of the shoulder and diabetes mellitus. Ann Rheum Dis 1972;31:69–71 .
- 22.↑
Wikipedia.org. 2019. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adhesive_capsulitis_of_shoulder (date last accessed 7 March 2019).
- 23.↑
Trail IA , Funk L , Rangan A , Nixon M . Textbook of shoulder surgery. Zurich: Springer International Publishing, 2019;628 .
- 26.↑
Reeves B, The natural history of the frozen shoulder syndrome. Scand J Rheumatol 1975;4:193–196 .
- 27.↑
Grey RG . The natural history of ‘idiopathic’ frozen shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1978;60:564 .
- 28.↑
Neviaser RJ , Neviaser TJ . The frozen shoulder: diagnosis and management. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987:223:59–64 .
- 29.↑
Wong CK , Levine WN & Deo K et al. Natural history of frozen shoulder: fact or fiction? A systematic review. Physiotherapy 2017;103:40–47 .
- 30.↑
Kitridis D , Tsikopoulos K , Bisbinas I , Papaioannidou P , Givissis P . Efficacy of pharmacological therapies for adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Am J Sports Med 2019;47:3552–3560 .
- 31.↑
Saltychev M , Laimi K , Virolainen P , Fredericson M . Effectiveness of hydrodilatation in adhesive capsulitis of shoulder: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scand J Surg 2018;107:285–293 .
- 32.↑
Yang C , Lv T , Yu T , Wong S , Lu M , Li Y . Acupuncture at Tiaokou (ST38) for shoulder adhesive capsulitis: what strengths does it have? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med 2018;2018:4197659 .
- 33.↑
Suh CH , Yun SJ , Jin W , Lee SH , Park SY , Park JS , Ryu KN . Systematic review and meta-analysis of magnetic resonance imaging features for diagnosis of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. Eur Radiol 2019;29-2:566-77.
- 34.↑
Tran G , Cowling P , Smith T , Bury J , Lucas A , Barr A , Kingsbury SR , Conaghan PG . What Imaging-Detected Pathologies Are Associated With Shoulder Symptoms and Their Persistence? A Systematic Literature Review. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2018;70-8:1169-84.
- 35.↑
Lin MT , Hsiao MY , Tu YK , Wang TG . Comparative Efficacy of Intra-Articular Steroid Injection and Distension in Patients With Frozen Shoulder: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2018;99-7:1383-94.e6.
- 36.↑
Wu WT , Chang KV , Han DS , Chang CH , Yang FS , Lin CP . Effectiveness of Glenohumeral Joint Dilatation for Treatment of Frozen Shoulder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Sci Rep 2017;7-1:10507.
- 37.↑
Wang W , Shi M , Zhou C , Shi Z , Cai X , Lin T , Yan S . Effectiveness of corticosteroid injections in adhesive capsulitis of shoulder: A meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017;96-28:e7529.
- 38.↑
Catapano M , Mittal N , Adamich J , Kumbhare D , Sangha H . Hydrodilatation With Corticosteroid for the Treatment of Adhesive Capsulitis: A Systematic Review. PM R 2018;10-6:623-35.
- 39.↑
Prodromidis AD , Charalambous CP . Is There a Genetic Predisposition to Frozen Shoulder?: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JBJS Rev 2016;4-2.
- 40.↑
Eljabu W , Klinger HM , von Knoch M . Prognostic factors and therapeutic options for treatment of frozen shoulder: a systematic review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2016;136-1:1-7.
- 41.↑
Ryan V , Brown H , , Minns Lowe CJ , Lewis JS . The pathophysiology associated with primary (idiopathic) frozen shoulder: A systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2016;17-1:340.
- 42.↑
Koh KH . Corticosteroid injection for adhesive capsulitis in primary care: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials. Singapore Med J 2016;57-12:646-57.
- 43.↑
Sun Y , Zhang P , Liu S , Li H , Jiang J , Chen S , Chen J . Intra-articular Steroid Injection for Frozen Shoulder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials With Trial Sequential Analysis. Am J Sports Med 2017;45-9:2171-9.
- 44.↑
Xiao RC , Walley KC , DeAngelis JP , Ramappa AJ . Corticosteroid Injections for Adhesive Capsulitis: A Review. Clin J Sport Med 2017;27-3:308-20.
- 45.↑
Page MJ , Green S , Kramer S , Johnston RV , McBain B , Chau M , Buchbinder R . Manual therapy and exercise for adhesive capsulitis (frozen shoulder). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014-8:Cd011275.
- 46.↑
Page MJ , Green S , Kramer S , Johnston RV , McBain B , Buchbinder R . Electrotherapy modalities for adhesive capsulitis (frozen shoulder). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014-10:Cd011324.
- 47.↑
Song A , Higgins LD , Newman J , Jain NB . Glenohumeral corticosteroid injections in adhesive capsulitis: a systematic search and review. PM R 2014;6-12:1143-56.
