| Methods |
Random allocation: Yes; Concealed allocation: Yes; Baseline comparability: Yes; Blind assessors: Yes; Blind subjects: No; Blind therapists: No; Adequate follow‐up: Yes; Intention‐to‐treat analysis: Yes; Between‐group comparisons: Yes; Point estimates & variability: Yes; Eligibility criteria: Yes |
| Participants |
180 participants aged over 18 years (mean age active ET 51; mean age placebo ET 50; mean age no ET and no US 54; mean age active US 50; mean age placebo US 51) with pain over deltoid on movement OR reduced GH ROM OR both and a standardised clinical assessment revealing soft tissue injury. |
| Interventions |
5 groups who received 12 exercise therapy classes in 6 weeks as well as: Group 1: Active ET (Interferential electrotherapy) and US (Ultrasound)Group 2: Active ET and dummy USGroup 3: Dummy ET and active USGroup 4: Dummy ET and dummy USGroup 5: no additional adjuncts.ET: Bipolar interferential current (45Hz sinusoidal biphasis, amp module 60‐100Hz rampt fall 1 see each and constant phase 2 sec in between.US: 0.8MHz 4cm², pulsed 2:8. |
| Outcomes |
Assessed at 6 weeks and 3, 6, 9 and 12 months.1. Recovery (7 point Likert scale) 2. Functional status (shoulder disability questionnaire) 3. Chief complaint 4. Pain 5. Clinical status6. ROM. |
| Notes |
|
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Low risk |
A ‐ Adequate |
