Comparison of Rotator Interval Injection Versus Intraarticular Hydrodilatation in Frozen Shoulder

Comparing the Efficacy of Rotator Interval Steroid Injection Versus Steroid Intraarticular Hydrodilatation in the Treatment of Frozen Shoulder

This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of hydrodilatation with steroid via posterior approach versus rotator interval approach for treating patients with adhesive capsulitis.

Adhesive capsulitis is a common cause of shoulder pain, and the efficacy of most interventions is limited. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of rotator interval injection with steroid with that of steroid hydrodilatatoin for treating adhesive capsulitis.

Design: a prospective, single-blinded, randomized, clinical trial

Patient and methods:

Patients with adhesive capsulitis were enrolled and randomly allocated into group 1 ( ultrasound guided rotator interval injection ) and group 2 (ultrasound guided steroid hydrodilatation). The patients were evaluated before treatment and were reevaluated 0, 6, and 12 weeks after the beginning of the treatment. Outcomes measures included a pain scale (visual analog scale), range of motion, Constant shoulder score, and Shoulder Pain And Disability Index.

Inclusion Criteria:

• Diagnosis of frozen shoulder by physical examination and ultrasonography

Exclusion Criteria:

1. other conditions involving the shoulder ( rheumatoid arthritis, Hill-Sachs lesions,osteoporosis, or malignancies in the shoulder region)
2. neurologic deficits affecting shoulder function in normal daily activities
3. shoulder pain caused by cervical radiculopathy
4. a history of drug allergy to xylocaine or corticosteroid
5. pregnancy or lactation;
6. received injection into the affected shoulder during the preceding 3 months
7. history of surgeries on the affected shoulders
8. Secondary frozen shoulder