This is a prospectively randomised blind study to determine which treatment- Manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) or Hydrodilatation is more effective for proven shoulder adhesive capsulitis. Forty patients with adhesive capsulitis were randomised to receive either of the two treatments. All patients were assessed by an independent investigator, with Visual Analogue Scores (VAS) and Constant scores, at three intervals “ pre-treatment, 2 months and 6 months following treatment. Twenty patients (mean age 55.2 years (44–70); duration of symptoms 33.7 weeks (8–76)) received hydrodilatation and eighteen (mean age 54.5 years (39–69); duration of symptoms 43.5 weeks (12–102)) underwent MUA (two patients dropped out). VAS scores in the hydrodilatation group were pre treatment 6.1 (n=20), 2.4 (n=18;p=0.001) at 2 months and 1.7 (n=17; p=0.0006) at 6 months. VAS scores in the MUA group were pre treatment 5.7 (n=18), 4.7 (n=16) at 2 months, and 2.7 (n=15;p=0.0006) at 6 months. The VAS pain scores in the hydrodilatation group were significantly better than the MUA group over the six month follow-up (p< 0.0001)Constant scores in the hydrodilatation group were 30.8 pre treatment, 57.4 (p=0.0004) at 2 months and 65.9 (p=0.0005) at 6 months. In the MUA group, Constant scores were 38 pre treatment, 60.2 (p=0.001) at 2 months and 59.5 (p=0.0006) at 6 months. Constant scores in the hydrodilataion group were again significantly better than the MUA group over the six month follow-up (p= 0.02). At final follow up, 93% of patients were satisfied or very satisfied after hydrodilatation compared to 71% of those receiving an MUA.

We have for the first time prospectively measured the outcome of two treatments “ MUA and hydrodilatation in patients with adhesive capsulitis. Our results suggest that although both treatments are effective in the majority of patients, hydrodilatation is significantly more effective than a manipulation under anaesthesia.