The effectiveness of graded motor imagery training on pain and functionality in patients with subacromial pain syndrome: A prospective,single-blind,randomized controlled trial

Abstract

Background

Pain from subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS) can limit individuals' daily activities and reduce physical performance. The effectiveness of graded motor imagery (GMI) training for this condition remains unexplored. This prospective, randomized controlled trial aimed to determine the effects of GMI training in patients with chronic painful SAPS.

Methods

Forty-two patients with SAPS were randomly assigned to the GMI (n = 21) and the control (n = 21) groups. Primary measures were the visual analogue scale (VAS), and the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Secondary measures were Active Range of Motion (AROM), muscle strength, lateralization performance and Kinesthetic and Visual Imagery Questionnaire (KVIQ). Evaluations occurred at baseline, postintervention (6 weeks), and after a 6-week follow up.

Results

The GMI group showed significantly greater improvements in both primary and secondary outcomes compared to the control group (p < 0.001). Significantly larger effect sizes were found in favor of the GMI group for VAS, DASH, abduction, external rotation AROM, muscle strength, lateralization performance, and KVIQ (ηp² > 0.14, p < 0.05, for all).

Conclusions

The integration of GMI training into conventional physiotherapy for SAPS rehabilitation provides more effective clinical results in improving pain intensity and increasing functionality.

Keywords

shoulder pain rotator cuff pain management mirror neurons functional status rehabilitation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ludewig

Cook

. Alterations in shoulder kinematics and associated muscle activity in people with symptoms of shoulder impingement. Phys Ther 2000; 80: 276–291.

Bandholm

Rasmussen

Aagaard

, et al. Force steadiness, muscle activity, and maximal muscle strength in subjects with subacromial impingement syndrome. Muscle Nerve 2006; 34: 631–639.

Arendt-Nielsen L and Graven-Nielsen

. Translational musculoskeletal pain research. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2011; 25: 209–226.

Dean

Gwilym

Carr

. Why does my shoulder hurt? A review of the neuroanatomical and biochemical basis of shoulder pain. Br J Sports Med 2013; 47: 1095–1104.

Woolf

. Central sensitization: implications for the diagnosis and treatment of pain. Pain 2011; 152: s2–s15.

Borstad

Woeste

. The role of sensitization in musculoskeletal shoulder pain. Braz J Phys Ther 2015; 19: 251–257.

Sanchis

Lluch

Nijs

, et al. The role of central sensitization in shoulder pain: a systematic literature review. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2015; 44: 710–716.

Paul

Soo Hoo

Chae

, et al. Central hypersensitivity in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012; 93: 2206–2209.

Moseley

. Graded motor imagery for pathologic pain: a randomized controlled trial. Neurology 2006; 67: 2129–2134.

10.

Méndez-Rebolledo

Gatica-Rojas

Torres-Cueco

, et al. Update on the effects of graded motor imagery and mirror therapy on complex regional pain syndrome type 1: a systematic review. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil 2017; 30: 441–449.

11.

Moseley

. Is successful rehabilitation of complex regional pain syndrome due to sustained attention to the affected limb? A randomised clinical trial. Pain 2005; 114: 54–61.

12.

Yap

BWD

Lim

ECW

. The effects of motor imagery on pain and range of motion in musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review using meta-analysis. Clin J Pain 2019; 35: 87–99.

13.

Hoyek

Di Rienzo

Collet

, et al. The therapeutic role of motor imagery on the functional rehabilitation of a stage II shoulder impingement syndrome. Disabil Rehabil 2014; 36: 1113–1119.

14.

Breckenridge

McAuley

Moseley

, et al. Is implicit motor imagery altered in people with shoulder pain? The shoulder left/right judgement task. Musculoskelet Sci Pract 2020; 48: 102159. [published correction appears in Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2021;51:102280. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msksp.2020.102280]. Musculoskelet Sci Pract 2020; 48: 102159.

15.

Moseley

. Graded motor imagery is effective for long-standing complex regional pain syndrome: a randomised controlled trial. Pain 2004; 108: 192–198.

16.

Candiri

Talu

Guner

, et al. The effect of graded motor imagery training on pain, functional performance, motor imagery skills, and kinesiophobia after total knee arthroplasty: randomized controlled trial. Korean J Pain 2023; 36: 369–381.

17.

Birinci

Kaya Mutlu

Altun

. The efficacy of graded motor imagery in post-traumatic stiffness of elbow: a randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2022; 31: 2147–2156.

18.

Araya-Quintanilla

Gutiérrez-Espinoza

Jesús Muñoz-Yanez

, et al. The short-term effect of graded motor imagery on the affective components of pain in subjects with chronic shoulder pain syndrome: Open-label single-arm prospective study. Pain Med 2020; 21: 2496–2501.

19.

Folstein

McHugh

. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975; 12: 189–198.

20.

Michaleff

Kamper

. PEDro systematic review update: the effectiveness of physiotherapy exercises in subacromical impingement syndrome. Br J Sports Med 2013; 47: 927–928.

21.

Kinsella

Pizzari

. Electromyographic activity of the shoulder muscles during rehabilitation exercises in subjects with and without subacromial pain syndrome: a systematic review. Shoulder Elbow 2017; 9: 112–126.

22.

Doiron-Cadrin

Lafrance

Saulnier

, et al. Shoulder rotator cuff disorders: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and semantic analyses of recommendations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2020; 101: 1233–1242.

23.

Moseley

Butler

Beames

, et al. The graded motor imagery handbook. Adelaide: NOI Group Publications, 2012.

24.

Wajon

. Recognise™ hands app for graded motor imagery training in chronic pain. J Physiother 2014; 60: 117.

25.

Boonstra

Schiphorst Preuper

Reneman

, et al. Reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale for disability in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Int J Rehabil Res 2008; 31: 165–169.

26.

Tashjian

Deloach

Porucznik

, et al. Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for visual analog scales (VAS) measuring pain in patients treated for rotator cuff disease. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2009; 18: 927–932.

27.

Hudak

Amadio

Bombardier

Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med 1996; 29: 602–608. [published correction appears in Am J Ind Med 1996 Sep;30(3):372]. Am J Ind Med 1996; 29(6): 602–608.

28.

Düger

Yakut

Öksüz

, et al. Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand-DASH) questionnaire. Fizyoter Rehabil 2006; 17: 99–107.

29.

Franchignoni

Vercelli

Giordano

, et al. Minimal clinically important difference of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand outcome measure (DASH) and its shortened version (QuickDASH). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2014; 44: 30–39.

30.

Mullaney

McHugh

Johnson

, et al. Reliability of shoulder range of motion comparing a goniometer to a digital level. Physiother Theory Pract 2010; 26: 327–333.

31.

Vermeulen

de Bock

van Houwelingen

, et al. A comparison of two portable dynamometers in the assessment of shoulder and elbow strength. Physiotherapy 2005; 91: 101–12.

32.

Malouin

Richards

Jackson

, et al. The Kinesthetic and Visual Imagery Questionnaire (KVIQ) for assessing motor imagery in persons with physical disabilities: a reliability and construct validity study. J Neurol Phys Ther 2007; 31: 20–29.

33.

Dilek

Aydan

Yakut

. Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Kinesthetic and Visual Imagery Questionnaire-20. J Exerc Ther Rehabil 2019; 6: 201–210.

34.

Kamper

Maher

Mackay

. Global rating of change scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses and considerations for design. J Man Manip Ther 2009; 17: 163–170.

35.

Richardson

JTE

. Eta squared and partial eta squared as measures of effect size in educational research. Educ Res Rev 2011; 6: 135–47.

36.

Suso-Martí

La Touche

Angulo-Díaz-Parreño

, et al. Effectiveness of motor imagery and action observation training on musculoskeletal pain intensity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Pain 2020; 24: 886–901.

37.

Ryan

Fullen

Rio

, et al. Effect of action observation therapy in the rehabilitation of neurologic and musculoskeletal conditions: a systematic review. Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl 2021; 3: 100106.

38.

Limakatso

Cashin

Williams

, et al. The efficacy of graded motor imagery and its components on phantom limb pain and disability: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Pain 2023; 7: 2188899.

39.

Yasaci

Celik

. Does integration of graded motor imagery training augment the efficacy of a multimodal physiotherapy program for patients with frozen shoulder? A randomized controlled trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2024; 483: 707–716.

40.

Gurudut

Godse

. Effectiveness of graded motor imagery in subjects with frozen shoulder: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Korean J Pain 2022; 35: 152–159.

41.

Hekim

Çolak

Bonab

MAR

. The effect of mirror therapy in patients with frozen shoulder. Shoulder Elbow 2023; 15: 218–227.

42.

Bowering

O'Connell

Tabor

, et al. The effects of graded motor imagery and its components on chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Pain 2013; 14: 3–13.

43.

Alschuler

Theisen-Goodvich

Haig

, et al. A comparison of the relationship between depression, perceived disability, and physical performance in persons with chronic pain. Eur J Pain 2008; 12: 757–764.