Effects and predictors of shoulder muscle massage for patients with posterior shoulder tightness

Table 1 Subject demographics

variable	Massage (n = 29)	Control (n = 23)
Gender (males:females)	8:21	6:17
Age (years)	54.8 ± 8.5	54.6 ± 7.9
Height (cm)	165.4 ± 5.8	163.8 ± 9.8
Weight (Kg)	65.3 ± 5.9	66.3 ± 5.7
Duration of symptoms (months)	14.8 ± 8.4	15.7 ± 7.8
Pre^a- Glenohumeral Internal rotation (°)	31.9 ± 11.2	28.7 ± 5.8
Post^a- Glenohumeral Internal rotation (°)	54.9 ± 12.1*	34.9 ± 10.8
Pre^a- slope (Kg/mm) for PD^b	0.63 ± 0.12	0.59 ± 0.18
Post^a- slope (Kg/mm) for PD^b	0.43 ± 0.10*	0.51 ± 0.12
Pre^a- slope (Kg/mm) for IF^c	0.64 ± 0.05	0.52 ± 0.13
Post^a- slope (Kg/mm) for IF^c	0.44 ± 0.06*	0.56 ± 0.11
Pre^a- slope (Kg/mm) for TM^d	0.47 ± 0.15	0.46 ± 0.12
Post^a- slope (Kg/mm) for TM^d	0.40 ± 0.13	0.42 ± 0.12
Pre^a-Flex-SF^e	33.3 ± 2.8	32.6 ± 3.8
Post^a-Flex-SF^e	40.5 ± 5.2*	31.7 ± 3.8

Pre^a and Post^a-massage PD ^b posterior deltoid; IF ^c infraspinatus; TM ^d teres minor
FLEX-SF ^e Flexilevel Scale of Shoulder Function.
*: There were significant differences between 2 groups (P < 0.005).
mean ± standard deviation

ISSN: 1471-2474