Lo shoulder pacemaker nella riabilitazione della protesi inversa

Set 11, 2024 | Letteratura Scientifica

SECEC 2024

Conlusioni: i pazienti che hanno ricevuto la stimolazione elettrica muscolare attivata dal movimento (Shoulder pacemaker) hanno dimostrato miglioramenti significativi nella funzione della spalla, nella mobilità e nel punteggio di soddisfazione del paziente (SSV) rispetto al gruppo di controllo. Questo tipo di terapia può migliorare i risultati clinici nei pazienti dopo una sostituzione inversa della spalla (RSA) anche a più di un anno dall’intervento.

Do Patients Benefit From Self-Based Training With Or Without Electromyostimulation 1 Year After Implantation After Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty? A Prospective-Randomized-Controlled-Study

Aim:

To compare the clinical results of patients who underwent Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty (RSA) that underwent a guided home-based training protocol (Control Group) compared to patients that underwent the same training protocol with an additional dynamic electromyostimulation (Shoulder-Pacemaker™, Intervention Group).

Background:It has been described that the clinical results of patients who underwent RSA are reaching a plateau one year after surgery. Electromyostimulation (EMS) has shown promising results for functional posterior instability, however, its potential benefit has not yet been investigated for patients after RSA. A training protocol was developed by physiotherapists and surgeons for patients who underwent RSA. This study examines if this training with or without EMS significantly improves shoulder function even 1 year after RSA.

Methods:This Study involved n=34 patients with primary osteoarthritis or cuff tear arthropathy who underwent RSA with a follow-up of 12-24 months after surgery. The same implant system was used in all patients. The intervention group (n=17) performed a six-week standardized training program with simultaneous EMS using the Shoulder Pacemaker™, while the control group (n=17) underwent the training program without EMS. Outcome measures were the Constant-Murley Shoulder Score (CS), range of motion (ROM), and Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), assessed pre- and post-intervention using an automated computer-based method (Show Motion) and additional clinical evaluation. Descriptive statistics and a two-sample t-test (p=0.05) were used for statistical analysis