CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03090555TMACSUpdated Mar 24, 2017

Translational Manipulation Under Interscalene Block for Adhesive Capsulitis of the Shoulder (TMACS)

An interventional study of Translational manipulation and Manual therapy in Shoulder Adhesive Capsulitis, Frozen Shoulder and Adhesive Capsulitis of Shoulder, sponsored by Daniel G. Rendeiro. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2017-03-24.

Sponsored by Daniel G. Rendeiro · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 13 years 2 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Jan 2004, registered Mar 2017).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
18
Allocation
Non-randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study evaluates the addition of translational manipulation under interscalene block, to a course of orthopaedic manual physical therapy for treatment of adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. Half the patients will receive a translational manipulation under interscalene block, plus 6 sessions of orthopaedic manual physical therapy. The other half will receive 7 sessions of physical therapy. The investigators hypothesize that the translational manipulation under interscalene block will provide additional benefit beyond the effect of in-clinic orthopaedic manual physical therapy alone.

Read the detailed description

Both translational manipulation under interscalene block and in-clinic orthopaedic manual physical therapy are thought to be useful for treating adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. However, no single intervention for this condition has been proven to be superior to others.

The translational manipulation under interscalene block may improve pain-free motion of the involved shoulder, by releasing tight tissue without the guarding and motion-limiting effect of active muscle tension. The interscalene block prevents the patient from actively contracting the muscles that control the involved shoulder, during the manipulation procedure.

One additional possible benefit of the translational manipulation under interscalene block, is that the technique loads the joint structures--bone, joint capsule--in a safer way with less angular torque than conventional/traditional manipulation under anaesthesia. This minimizes the risk of physical/mechanical harm from the procedure.

02

Conditions studied

  • Shoulder Adhesive Capsulitis
  • Frozen Shoulder
  • Adhesive Capsulitis of Shoulder

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • adhesive capsulitis
  • clinical trial
  • manipulation
03

In context

Bursitis

411 studies on the registry are indexed under Bursitis; 112 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 18 is below the median of 45 across 371 interventional studies indexed under Bursitis.

Browse Bursitis studies →

Lead sponsor

This is the only study on the registry with Daniel G. Rendeiro as lead sponsor.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Military healthcare system beneficiaries 18 years old or older
  • Chief complaint of loss of shoulder range of motion
  • Passive glenohumeral abduction less than 75 degrees
  • Sufficient English-language skills to understand the study protocol.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Clinical diagnosis of diabetes (type I or II)
  • Clinically evident and symptomatic rotator cuff tear or cervical radiculopathy
  • Pain as the primary impairment (versus limitation of motion as the primary impairment)
  • Having contraindications to an interscalene block.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Non-randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
18 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Translational Manipulation

    Participants received an interscalene block on the affected side. Then, a physical therapist performed thrust manipulations on the affected shoulder until full passive physiologic motion was restored. These participants returned to the clinic approximately 3 days later for the first of 6 manual therapy (MT) sessions. The first clinic treatment session included instruction in a home program of static stretching, resistive exercise, and ice, issue of an illustrated handout and digital video disc detailing the same program, and manual therapy (MT) by a physical therapist that included all indicated grades of non-thrust manipulation. Subsequent clinic treatment sessions included additional MT, progression of the strengthening exercises, and reinforcement of the home program.

    Procedure: Translational manipulation · Procedure: Manual therapy

  • Active comparator
    Comparison Group

    Participants in the comparison group did not undergo a session of translational manipulation. In order to equalize the number of intervention sessions, members of this group underwent 7 in-clinic sessions of manual therapy (MT). The first clinic treatment session for all study participants included instruction in the home program of static stretching, resistive exercise, and ice, issue of an illustrated handout and digital video disc detailing the same program, and MT by a physical therapist that included all indicated grades of non-thrust manipulation. Subsequent clinic treatment sessions included additional MT, progression of the strengthening exercises, and reinforcement of the home program.

    Procedure: Manual therapy

Interventions

  • ProcedureTranslational manipulation

    After the patient receives an interscalene block on the affected side, a physical therapist performs a series of thrust manipulations on the participant's affected shoulder. The participant's identified limitations of physiological and accessory motion revealed during manual examination guided the physical therapist's choice of technique, which primarily consisted of an accessory superior to inferior accessory gliding motion performed in a physiological position of limited motion. Additional gliding manipulations in combined movement positions such as increased flexion or abduction plus internal or external rotation were utilized until full passive physiologic motion was restored.

  • ProcedureManual therapy

    The first clinic treatment session for all study participants included instruction in the home program of static stretching, resistive exercise, and ice, issue of an illustrated handout and digital video disc detailing the same program, and manual therapy (MT) by a physical therapist that included all indicated grades of non-thrust manipulation of the joints and soft tissue. The MT intervention was targeted toward any identifiable upper quarter pain or movement impairments. Subsequent clinic treatment sessions included additional MT, progression of the strengthening exercises, and reinforcement of the home program.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Change in Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI)

    Measure of individual pain and disability

    Time frame: baseline, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, 48 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Percent of normal

    Patient estimate of percent of full functional capacity of involved shoulder

    Time frame: 48 months

  2. Activity limitations

    Patient estimate of identified activities limited by involved shoulder function

    Time frame: 48 months

  3. Medication use

    Patient estimate of medications taken due to involved shoulder pain

    Time frame: 48 months

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Brooke Army Medical Center
    Fort Sam Houston, Texas 78234, United States
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Placzek JD, Roubal PJ, Kulig K, Pagett BT, Wiater JM. Theory and technique of translational manipulation for adhesive capsulitis. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2004 Apr;33(4):173-9. PubMed 15132324 ↗
  • Placzek JD, Roubal PJ, Freeman DC, Kulig K, Nasser S, Pagett BT. Long-term effectiveness of translational manipulation for adhesive capsulitis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998 Nov;(356):181-91. doi: 10.1097/00003086-199811000-00025. PubMed 9917683 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 24, 2017, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03090555
Lead sponsor
Daniel G. Rendeiro
Responsible party
Daniel G. Rendeiro (Program Director, Brooke Army Medical Center) — Sponsor-investigator
First posted
Mar 24, 2017
Start date
Jan 5, 2004
Primary completion
May 31, 2006
Completion
Apr 27, 2011
Last update
Mar 24, 2017

Study contacts

Daniel G. Rendeiro, DSc
principal investigator · Army-Baylor University Doctoral Fellowship in Orthopaedic Manual Physical Therapy

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Mar 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion