Search

Background. Soft tissue massage and exercise are commonly used to treat episodes of shoulder pain. Objective. The study objective was to compare the effects of soft tissue massage and exercise with those of exercise alone on pain, disability, and range of motion in people with nonspecific shoulder pain. Design. This was a randomized controlled trial. Setting. The study was conducted in public hospital physical therapy clinics in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Participants. The study participants were 80 people with an average age of 62.6 years (SD=12.2) who were referred to physical therapists for treatment of nonspecific shoulder pain. Intervention. Participants were randomly assigned to either a group that received soft tissue massage around the shoulder and exercises (n=40) or a group that received exercise only (n=40) for 4 weeks. Measurements. The primary outcome was improvement in pain, as measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale, 1 week after the cessation of treatment. Secondary outcomes were disability and active flexion, abduction, and hand-behind-back range of motion. Measurements were obtained at baseline, 1 week after the cessation of treatment, and 12 "weeks after the cessation of treatment. Results. The between-group difference in pain scores from the baseline to 12 weeks after the cessation of treatment demonstrated a small significant difference in favor of the group receiving exercise only (mean difference= 14.7 mm). There were no significant differences between groups in any other variable. Limitations. It was not possible to mask therapists or participants to group allocation. Diagnostic tests were not used on participants to determine specific shoulder pathology. Conclusions. The addition of soft tissue massage to an exercise program for the shoulder conferred no additional benefit for improving pain, disability, or range of motion in people with nonspecific shoulder pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, we compared the relationships of body mass index (BMI) and body adiposity index (BAI) with body fat percentage (BF%) in a Caucasian, European population. BF% was measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry in a population-based cross-sectional study of 5,193 middle-aged (47–49 years) and elderly (71–74 years) men and women from the Hordaland Health Study in western Norway from 1997 to 1999. In the total population, the correlation between BAI and BF% was stronger (r = 0.78) than the correlation between BMI and BF% (r = 0.56) with similar results in the middle-aged and elderly groups. However, in men and women separately, BMI was a better correlate of BF% (for men, r = 0.76; for women, r = 0.81) than was BAI (for men, r = 0.57; for women, r = 0.72). BMI was also a better correlate of BF% than was BAI assessed by partial correlations adjusted for sex (for BMI-BF%, r = 0.79; for BAI-BF%, r = 0.67). Bland-Altman plots and BF%-stratified analyses showed that BAI tended to overestimate BF% in lean subjects and to underestimate it in those with higher proportions of body fat, but that it predicted BF% well for those whose BMI was in a normal range. At the individual level and in population studies adjusted for sex, BMI outperforms BAI as a predictor of BF%. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]