Title Page
Abstract
Contents
1. Instruction 11
1.1. Background and necessity 11
1.2. Purpose 13
1.3. Hypothesis 14
2. Theoretical Background 15
2.1. Anatomical structure of the shoulder joint 15
2.2. Shoulder impingement syndrome 17
2.3. Shoulder rehabilitation exercises 19
3. Methods 20
3.1. Participants 20
3.2. Study procedures 21
3.3. Study methods (Interventions) 23
3.3.1. Kaltenborn-Evjenth centralization exercise (KECE) 24
3.3.2. General exercise group 29
3.4. Assessments 33
3.4.1. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) 33
3.4.2. Range of motion (ROM) 34
3.4.3. Disability of arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score 36
3.4.4. Handgrip strength 39
3.5. Statistical analysis 40
4. Results 41
4.1. General characteristics of the subjects and homogeneity tests 41
4.2. Comparison of the pain 42
4.3. Comparison of the Range of Motion (ROM) 44
4.3.1. Comparison of shoulder flexion 44
4.3.2. Comparison of shoulder abduction 46
4.3.3. Comparison of shoulder external rotation 48
4.3.4. Comparison of shoulder internal rotation 50
4.4. Comparison of upper extremity dysfunction 52
4.4.1. Comparison of the disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) 52
4.5. Comparison of the handgrip strength 54
5. Discussion 56
5.1. Kaltenborn-Evjenth centralization exercise and pain 57
5.2. Shoulder joint mobilization and Range of Motion(ROM) 58
5.3. Kaltenborn-Evjenth centralization exercise and upper extremity dysfunction 59
5.4. Kalteborn-Evjenth centralization exercise and handgrip strength 60
5.5. Limitations 61
6. Conclusion 63
List of references 65
List of abbreviations 73
Appendix 76
6.1. Upper extremities function test : KDASH (Korea Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand), Korea ver. 76
6.2. Abstract(Korean) 79
6.3. Agreement to Participate in Research(Korean) 81
6.4. Agreement to Participate in Research(English 83
6.5. Explanation for the subject agreement(Korean) 85
6.6. Explanation for the subject agreement(English) 86
Table 1. Interventions 24
Table 2. General characteristics of the subjects and homogeneity tests 41
Table 3. Comparison of VAS between the experimental group and the control group 42
Table 4. Comparison of shoulder flexion ROM between the experimental and the control group 44
Table 5. Comparison of shoulder abduction ROM between the experimental group and the control group 46
Table 6. Comparison of shoulder external ROM between the experimental group and the control group 48
Table 7. Comparison of shoulder internal ROM between the experimental group and the control group 50
Table 8. Comparison of DASH scores between the experimental group and the control group 52
Table 9. Comparison of handgrip strength between the experimental group and the control group 54
Figure 1. Flow chart 22
Figure 2. KECE posterior inferior direction, 1st week[이미지참조] 25
Figure 3. KECE posterior direction, 2nd week[이미지참조] 26
Figure 4. KECE Adduction exercise, 3rd week[이미지참조] 27
Figure 5. KECE combination of adduction and abduction exercise, 4th week[이미지참조] 28
Figure 6. Prone position internal and external rotation exercises 30
Figure 7. Sitting internal and external rotation exercises 31
Figure 8. Scaption exercise 32
Figure 9. Visual Analog Scale, VAS 33
Figure 10. Goniometer, Jin-Medical, Korea 35
Figure 11. Shoulder Range of Motion (Flexion, Abduction, Internal rotation, and External rotation) 35
Figure 12. The disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) questionnaire 38
Figure 13. Hand strength test 39
Figure 14. Comparison of the pain score (VAS) between the experimental and the control group 43
Figure 15. Comparison of the shoulder flexion ROM between the experimental group and the... 45
Figure 16. Comparison of shoulder abduction ROM between the experimental group and the... 47
Figure 17. Comparison of shoulder external rotation ROM between the experimental group and... 49
Figure 18. Comparison of shoulder internal rotation ROM between the experimental group and... 51
Figure 19. Comparison of DASH scores between the experimental group and the control group 53
Figure 20. Comparison of handgrip strength between the experimental group and the control group 55