EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 8 (2022) SICOT-J, 8 (2022) 25 Full HTML
Open Access
Issue
SICOT-J
Volume 8, 2022
Article Number 25
Number of page(s) 6
Section Shoulder
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2022026
Published online 14 June 2022

© The Authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2022

Licence Creative CommonsThis is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Introduction

Frozen shoulder or adhesive capsulitis occurs in 3–5% of adults. The peak incidence of the cases is in individuals 40–60 years old [1]. The exact etiology of frozen shoulder remains unknown. Chronic inflammation and fibrosis are hypothesized to play a part in the pathogenesis of frozen shoulder [2].

Patients with frozen shoulder may suffer discomfort or even disability on the affected side of the shoulder, and the illness resolution may take months [3]. Several treatment modalities alleviate the reduced range of motion, e.g., rest, analgesia, active/passive mobilization, acupuncture, physiotherapy, oral/injected corticosteroid, capsule distention, and surgical capsule release [1]. However, no consensus exists on the most efficacious treatments for this condition [4].

Hydrodilatation of the shoulder joint capsule was a novel treatment to alleviate the pain of the affected shoulder. The procedure may be given with or without an adjuvant corticosteroid. Hydrodilatation, using saline and a corticosteroid, was superior in short-term pain reduction and range of motion improvement compared to management using only physiotherapy and corticosteroid injection in patients treated for frozen shoulder [5]. The proposed hypothesis regarding the mechanism of action in hydrodilatation and pain reduction in patients with the frozen shoulder was associated with synovitis and fibrosis removal [6, 7]. Previous studies also noted better pain reduction in patients receiving hydrodilatation with adjuvant corticosteroid than only corticosteroid injection [8, 9]. Several other adjuvants were studied in frozen shoulder treatment using hydrodilatation [5, 10].

The hydrodilatation method can cause pain in the shoulder during the intervention, so early manual exercise after the intervention is required to inhibit pain [11]. A suprascapular nerve block in the spinoglenoid notch provides pain relief during the intervention [1]. The choice of suprascapular nerve block is because the suprascapular, which arises from the C4–6 spinal nerves, branches out of the upper trunk of the brachial plexus and innervates 70% of the shoulder joint. Intervention in the spinoglenoid notch is expected to protect only the sensory and motor functions of the suprascapular nerve [7, 12–14]. The literature comparing the efficacy of suprascapular nerve block at the spinoglenoid notch used as an adjunct in hydrodilatation of frozen shoulder remains sparse, specifically in Indonesia.

Therefore, this study aims to understand the effects of augmentation of a suprascapular nerve block at the spinoglenoid notch in hydrodilatation to treat frozen shoulder hydrodilatation.

Material and methods

Study design

This study retrospectively observed the medical records of 31 patients (40–60 years old) diagnosed with and treated for primary frozen shoulder in freezing to the frozen phase transition, in Hasan Sadikin General Hospital, between 2019 and 2021.

Inclusion criteria

This study included patients 40–60 years old, in the freezing to the frozen phase transition, included in the Zuckerman diagnostic criteria, and patients diagnosed with primary frozen shoulder.

Zuckerman’s criteria, mentioned in the inclusion criteria, consist of:

  1. Sudden onset.

  2. Range of motion (ROM) during the active and passive elevation of the shoulders <100°.

  3. ROM limitation in external rotation <50% on the contralateral side.

  4. Shoulder pain during the night.

  5. Normal radiographical findings.

Exclusion criteria included other shoulder pathologies and some medication histories.

Exclusion criteria

Patients who refuse the intervention; who have a history of shoulder surgery, breast surgery, and fracture around the shoulder and upper extremities; have a cerebrovascular disease and cervical radiculopathy; with systemic disease (e.g., diabetes mellitus); who underwent shoulder surgery during the study; who obtained other additional therapy outside the study; and have secondary and tertiary frozen shoulder including extracapsular pathology were excluded from this study.

Sample collection

The samples in the study were divided into two groups. Group A received hydrodilatation with saline and corticosteroid injection without suprascapular nerve block augmentation at the spinoglenoid notch. Group B received hydrodilatation with saline, corticosteroid injection, and suprascapular nerve block augmentation at the spinoglenoid notch. All samples were conducted with three types of examinations before the intervention, consisting of visual analog scale (VAS), American shoulder and elbow surgeons (ASES) scoring, and disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score.

Intervention

Patients in both groups will receive hydrodilatation and corticosteroid injection under ultrasonography (USG) guidance. The posterior approach was used in all procedures. During the process, the operator stands behind the patient and monitors to accomplish an ergonomic position in line with the ultrasound. The ultrasound monitor is placed in front of the patient. The patient is in lateral decubitus with affected palm to nonaffected shoulder with padding to protect the prominent area of the body.

In group A, patients who received hydrodilatation used 15–20 mL of saline and 40 mg of triamcinolone and approached posteriorly for glenohumeral joint injection, starting 2 cm below the posterolateral acromion and shifting to the medial side (Figure 2). For group B, the patients received an augmentation suprascapular nerve block at the spinoglenoid notch with 4 mL bupivacaine (0.5%), 4 mL lidocaine (2%), and 20 mg triamcinolone before the hydrodilatation procedure. The injection site is 2 cm below the spine scapula (Figures 1 and 2).

Clinical evaluation

Patients were regularly evaluated for VAS, ASES scoring, and DASH scores. The procedures and evaluation of all three scores were performed by the same physician in charge of the patient. The early manual exercise was prescribed after the hydrodilatation with or without suprascapular nerve block at the spinoglenoid notch. The first evaluation is VAS assessed in the intraintervention between both groups. The patients were also evaluated on month 1 of follow-up, and used VAS, DASH scoring, and ASES scoring at month 6 of follow-up.

Data analysis

Data analyses were performed using the Statistical Program for Social Sciences, version 25. Univariate tests were performed using the t-test and Mann–Whitney test on intergroup comparisons. According to the previous normality test, paired t-tests and Wilcoxon tests were performed on each variable. A P-value of <0.05 was deemed significant. Normality tests were performed for the study before further analysis using the Shapiro–Wilk test.

Results

Groups A and B consisted of 16 and 15 patients, respectively (Figure 3). No significant differences in baseline characteristics (Table 1) between both groups were noted (p > 0.05). In group A, the intrainjection VAS score was not significantly different from the preintervention score (p = 0.215), whereas group B had a significant difference (p < 0.001).

thumbnail Figure 1

The suprascapular nerve at the supraglenoid notch using USG. The operator stands behind the patient, parallel to the ultrasound monitor, to achieve an ergonomic position. The ultrasound monitor is placed in front of the patient. The patient is in a lateral decubitus position, with the affected palm against the nonaffected shoulder and padding to protect the prominent area of the body. A sterile technique was used to prepare and clean the affected shoulder. The injection site for the suprascapular nerve block at the spinoglenoid notch is 2 cm below the spine scapula (A). An echogenic 23-G (3.5 in) spinal needle is inserted from medial to lateral (B). Injection (20 mg triamcinolone acetonide, 4 mL 2% lidocaine, and 4 mL 0.5% bupivacaine as a cocktail) was given and waited for 1–2 min.

thumbnail Figure 2

Identification and glenohumeral hydrodilatation on frozen shoulder. A posterior approach for glenohumeral joint injection created an anatomical landmark approximately 1–2 cm below the posterolateral acromion and shifted to the medial, short-axis probe position (A). Echogenic needle insertion in-plane position from the lateral to the medial, penetrating the infraspinatus muscle and posterior capsule, injecting the steroid (40 mg triamcinolone acetonide) as 15–20 mL aquabidest (B).

thumbnail Figure 3

Research sampling flow. This study retrospectively observed and followed 31 patients. The samples were divided into two groups in the study. Group A received hydrodilatation with saline and corticosteroid injection without suprascapular nerve block augmentation at the spinoglenoid notch. Group B received hydrodilatation with saline, corticosteroid injection, and suprascapular nerve block augmentation at the spinoglenoid aperture. Groups A and B consisted of 16 and 15 patients, respectively.

Table 1

Baseline characteristics.

Significant differences between VAS, ASES, and DASH scores were noted within the groups with pre- and postscores in all follow-up periods (Table 2; p = 0.001). Differences between groups A and B are outlined in Table 3. Significant differences exist in the delta between pre-and postscores between groups in several variables. Functional scores were significantly higher in month 1 in all three scores used for assessment (p < 0.05); however, no significant differences were noted in month 6 of reviews on all three scores (p > 0.05).

Table 2

Functional assessment for groups A and B before and after intervention.

Table 3

Comparison of Delta scores before and after procedure between time periods.

Discussion

Frozen shoulder is a debilitating problem that requires comprehensive diagnosis and management. Patients usually recover, but the possibility of not reobtaining a full ROM exists. Thus, early exercises are necessary to achieve their full ROM. The result of this study shows that suprascapular nerve block plays a role in decreasing pain in intraintervention (0.69 vs. 5.73; p < 0.05) and month 1 of the follow-up (3.44 vs. 6.40; p < 0.05), but not significant on month 6 group A and B after intervention (5.88 vs. 7.20; p > 0.05). Better delta functional scores were noted in the therapy group during month 1 of the follow-up (delta ASES: 19.29 vs. 34.40, p < 0.05; delta DASH: 17.88 vs. 38.15, p < 0.05). The difference in functional score on month 6 between both groups was not significantly different (delta ASES: 31.97 vs. 30.31, p > 0.05; delta DASH: 36.63 vs. 38.92, p > 0.05).

The study’s limitations were that this study used a retrospective study design and prospectively followed the development of patients’ pain and functional scores. The sample size and possible biases when selecting the patients were due to the single-center nature of the study. Bias may exist in the intervention results because the possibility of sample non-compliance with research procedures unknown to the researcher was noted. The self-limiting condition of the frozen shoulder meant that treatment should focus on restoring mobility and reducing pain in the affected shoulder to mitigate the possible impact on the quality of life.

Even though the frozen shoulder is a self-limiting condition, a study showed that the disease duration, if untreated, is around 4–36 months with an average of 15 months. Some studies show significant improvement in shoulder function, but other studies mentioned that 54% and 7% of patients had slight and marked restrictions, respectively [15]. The hydrodilatation method can provide mechanical adhesiolysis to facilitate increasing glenohumeral ROM. However, the procedure can create pain due to the overdistention of the glenohumeral joint capsule. The pain that follows will prevent early shoulder manual exercise from achieving functional shoulder ROM [11, 16–18]. One rationale for using a nerve block in frozen shoulder treatment was to give early pain relief from the affected shoulder [1, 19]. This study shows that suprascapular nerve block has decreased pain intervention. The suprascapular nerve block at the spinoglenoid notch performed in the study aimed to block the noxious stimuli to the glenohumeral joint from the suprascapular nerve. The suprascapular nerve innervated ~70% of the shoulder [13, 20]. Previous studies correlated earlier mobilizations with better outcomes in patients with frozen shoulders [17, 18].

The hydrodilatation of the shoulder capsule with saline and corticosteroids was the mainstay treatment for patients suffering from symptomatic frozen shoulders. Prior studies found significant improvement in function and pain reduction scores on the affected shoulder with a suprascapular nerve block [21]. Studies comparing the treatment with or without addition nerve block in hydrodilatation were relatively scarce.

Significant differences in pain and functional scores in this study were noted in both groups in the short-term evaluation. Therefore, the augmentation of suprascapular nerve block at the spinoglenoid notch in glenohumeral hydrodilatation for frozen shoulder remained effective. Better functional scores were noted in the therapy group during month 1 of the follow-up. In 2020, Majeed and Choukimath conducted a randomized controlled trial that mentioned that suprascapular nerve block improved faster and better than corticosteroid injections [21].

This study showed that the functional score in month 6 of follow-up between both groups was not significantly different. Previous studies noted that the suprascapular nerve block and intra-articular steroid injection only improved short-term outcomes (2 months after intervention) in terms of pain reduction and improvement in functional scores of the affected shoulder and not in long-term outcomes (1 year after the intervention), evaluated with function VASs (pain VAS and function VAS, respectively), ASES score, the Korean shoulder scoring system, the constant score, the simple shoulder test, and the shoulder pain and disability index [22]. Being a self-limiting condition, the treatment of frozen shoulder is meant to be symptomatic [23].

Conclusion

A suprascapular nerve block at the spinoglenoid notch is an effective adjunctive treatment to hydrodilatation of shoulder capsules for frozen shoulder. The therapy effectively reduced pain and immediately improved functional scores to facilitate shoulder rehabilitation procedures to obtain an operating ROM.

Conflict of interest

The author reports no conflicts of interest in this work.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific funding.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval was obtained from the local ethics committee (Research Ethics Committee, Hasan Sadikin Hospital, Bandung, Indonesia [LB.02.01/X/X.6.5/189/2020]) for the analysis and publication of the presented data.

Authors contributions

Rifki Albana: Conceptualization, Visualization, Methodology, and Writing.

Renaldi Prasetia: Surgeon, Conceptualization, Visualization, Methodology, Writing and Supervision.

Andri Primadhi: Methodology and Writing Revision.

Agus Hadian Rahim: Methodology and Writing Revision.

Yoyos Dias Ismiarto: Methodology and Writing Revision.

Hermawan Nagar Rasyid: Surgeon, Conceptualization, Writing and Supervision.

Informed consent

This article does not contain any studies involving human subjects.

Acknowledgments

An Academic Leadership Grant Universitas Padjadjaran supported the study, granted to YSP (1959/UN6.3.1/PT.00/ 2021). Enago provided grammar correction.

References

  1. Sonune S, Gaur A, Gupta S (2016) Comparative study of ultrasound guided supra-scapular nerve block versus intra-articular steroid injection in frozen shoulder. Int J Res Orthop 2, 387. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. Lubis AM, Lubis VK (2013) Matrix metalloproteinase, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase and transforming growth factor-beta 1 in frozen shoulder, and their changes as response to intensive stretching and supervised neglect exercise. J Orthop Sci: Offl J Jpn Orthop Assoc 18(4), 519. [Google Scholar]
  3. Eljabu W, Klinger HM, von Knoch M (2016) Prognostic factors and therapeutic options for treatment of frozen shoulder: A systematic review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136(1), 1. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cho CH, Bae KC, Kim DH (2019) Treatment strategy for frozen shoulder. Clin Orthop Surg 11(3), 249. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Lädermann A, Piotton S, Abrassart S, Mazzolari A, Ibrahim M, Stirling P (2021) Hydrodilatation with corticosteroids is the most effective conservative management for frozen shoulder. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 29(8), 2553. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Mitra P, Bhattacharya D (2016) Comparison of clinical effects of ultrasound guided suprascapular nerve block and oral pregabalin versus suprascapular nerve block alone for pain relief in frozen shoulder. Indian J Pain 30, 49. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  7. Ozkan K, Ozcekic AN, Sarar S, Cift H, Ozkan FU, Unay K (2012) Suprascapular nerve block for the treatment of frozen shoulder. Saudi J Anaesth 6(1), 52. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. de Jong BA, Dahmen R, Hogeweg JA, Marti RK (1998) Intra-articular triamcinolone acetonide injection in patients with capsulitis of the shoulder: A comparative study of two dose regimens. Clin Rehabil 12(3), 211. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Koh KH (2016) Corticosteroid injection for adhesive capsulitis in primary care: A systematic review of randomised clinical trials. Singapore Med J 57(12), 646. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Rymaruk S, Peach C (2017) Indications for hydrodilatation for frozen shoulder. EFORT Open Rev 2(11), 462. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Saltychev M, Laimi K, Virolainen P, Fredericson M (2018) Effectiveness of hydrodilatation in adhesive capsulitis of shoulder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Scand J Surg 107(4), 285. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Roark GL (2003) Suprascapular nerve block at the spinoglenoid notch. Reg Anesth Pain Med 28(4), 361. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Ritchie ED, Tong D, Chung F, Norris AM, Miniaci A, Vairavanathan SD (1997) Suprascapular nerve block for postoperative pain relief in arthroscopic shoulder surgery: A new modality? Anesth Analg 84(6), 1306. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Hashiguchi H, Iwashita S, Ohkubo A, Takai S (2016) SLAP repair with arthroscopic decompression of spinoglenoid cyst. Sicot J 2, 1. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Vastamäki H, Kettunen J, Vastamäki M (2012) The natural history of idiopathic frozen shoulder: A 2- to 27-year followup study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470(4), 1133. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Page P, Labbe A (2010) Adhesive capsulitis: Use the evidence to integrate your interventions. North Am J Sports Phys Ther: NAJSPT 5(4), 266. [Google Scholar]
  17. Anjum R, Aggarwal J, Gautam R, Pathak S, Sharma A (2020) Evaluating the outcome of two different regimes in adhesive capsulitis: A prospective clinical study. Med Princ Pract 29(3), 225. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Kelley MJ, McClure PW, Leggin BG (2009) Frozen shoulder: Evidence and a proposed model guiding rehabilitation. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 39(2), 135. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Wu YT, Ho CW, Chen YL, Li TY, Lee KC, Chen LC (2014) Ultrasound-guided pulsed radiofrequency stimulation of the suprascapular nerve for adhesive capsulitis: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Anesth Analg 119(3), 686. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Lee SH, Choi HH, Lee DG (2020) Effectiveness of new nerve blocks method on the articular branches of the suprascapular and subscapular nerves to treat shoulder pain. Medicine 99(35), e22050. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Majeed A, Choukimath SK (2020) Single shot suprascapular nerve block vs. single shot intraarticular corticosteroid injection as an adjuvant to physical therapy in patients with frozen shoulder – Which is better? A randomized control study. J Musculoskelet Disord Treat 6, 81. [Google Scholar]
  22. Jung TW, Lee SY, Min SK, Lee SM, Yoo JC (2019) Does combining a suprascapular nerve block with an intra-articular corticosteroid injection have an additive effect in the treatment of adhesive capsulitis? A comparison of functional outcomes after short-term and minimum 1-year follow-up. Orthop J Sports Med 7(7), 2325967119859277. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Konarski W, Poboży T, Hordowicz M, Poboży K, Domańska J (2020) Current concepts of natural course and in management of frozen shoulder: A clinical overview. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 12(4), 8832. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Cite this article as: Albana R, Prasetia R, Primadhi A, Rahim AH, Ismiarto YD & Rasyid HN (2022) The role of suprascapular nerve block in hydrodilatation for frozen shoulder. SICOT-J 8, 25

All Tables

Table 1

Baseline characteristics.

In the text
Table 2

Functional assessment for groups A and B before and after intervention.

In the text
Table 3

Comparison of Delta scores before and after procedure between time periods.

In the text

All Figures

thumbnail Figure 1

The suprascapular nerve at the supraglenoid notch using USG. The operator stands behind the patient, parallel to the ultrasound monitor, to achieve an ergonomic position. The ultrasound monitor is placed in front of the patient. The patient is in a lateral decubitus position, with the affected palm against the nonaffected shoulder and padding to protect the prominent area of the body. A sterile technique was used to prepare and clean the affected shoulder. The injection site for the suprascapular nerve block at the spinoglenoid notch is 2 cm below the spine scapula (A). An echogenic 23-G (3.5 in) spinal needle is inserted from medial to lateral (B). Injection (20 mg triamcinolone acetonide, 4 mL 2% lidocaine, and 4 mL 0.5% bupivacaine as a cocktail) was given and waited for 1–2 min.
In the text
thumbnail Figure 2

Identification and glenohumeral hydrodilatation on frozen shoulder. A posterior approach for glenohumeral joint injection created an anatomical landmark approximately 1–2 cm below the posterolateral acromion and shifted to the medial, short-axis probe position (A). Echogenic needle insertion in-plane position from the lateral to the medial, penetrating the infraspinatus muscle and posterior capsule, injecting the steroid (40 mg triamcinolone acetonide) as 15–20 mL aquabidest (B).
In the text
thumbnail Figure 3

Research sampling flow. This study retrospectively observed and followed 31 patients. The samples were divided into two groups in the study. Group A received hydrodilatation with saline and corticosteroid injection without suprascapular nerve block augmentation at the spinoglenoid notch. Group B received hydrodilatation with saline, corticosteroid injection, and suprascapular nerve block augmentation at the spinoglenoid aperture. Groups A and B consisted of 16 and 15 patients, respectively.
In the text

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.