Frozen shoulder is commonly encountered in general
orthopaedic practice. It may arise spontaneously without an obvious
predisposing cause, or be associated with a variety of local or
systemic disorders. Diagnosis is based upon the recognition of the
characteristic features of the pain, and selective limitation of
passive external rotation. The macroscopic and histological features
of the capsular contracture are well-defined, but the underlying
pathological processes remain poorly understood. It may cause protracted
disability, and imposes a considerable burden on health service
resources. Most patients are still managed by physiotherapy in primary
care, and only the more refractory cases are referred for specialist
intervention. Targeted therapy is not possible and treatment remains predominantly
symptomatic. However, over the last ten years, more active interventions
that may shorten the clinical course, such as capsular distension
arthrography and arthroscopic capsular release, have become more popular. This review describes the clinical and pathological features
of frozen shoulder. We also outline the current treatment options,
review the published results and present our own treatment algorithm.
There are many types of treatment used to manage the frozen shoulder, but there is no consensus on how best to manage patients with this painful and debilitating condition. We conducted a review of the evidence of the effectiveness of interventions used to manage
This study prospectively evaluated the outcome of manipulation under anaesthesia and hydrodilatation as treatments for adhesive capsulitis. A total of 36 patients (38 shoulders) were randomised to receive either method, with all patients being treated in stage II of the disease process. The mean age of the patients was 55.2 years (44 to 70) and the mean duration of symptoms was 33.7 weeks (12 to 76). Eighteen shoulders (17 patients) underwent manipulation under anaesthesia and 20 (19 patients) had hydrodilatation. There were three insulin-dependent diabetics in each group. The mean visual analogue score in the manipulation under anaesthesia group was 5.7 (3 to 8.5; n = 18) before treatment, 4.7 (0 to 8.5; n = 16) at two months (paired The mean Constant score in those manipulated was 36 (26 to 66) before treatment, 58.5 (24 to 90) at two months (paired The range of movement improved in all patients over the six months, but was not significantly different between the groups. At the final follow-up, 94% of patients (17 of 18) were satisfied or very satisfied after hydrodilatation compared with 81% (13 of 16) of those receiving a manipulation. Most of our patients were treated successfully, but those undergoing hydrodilatation did better than those who were manipulated.
We treated 22 patients with a diagnosis of