This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to identify, critically appraise, and synthesize current evidence regarding the effects of spinal mobilization on physical function in patients with stroke. Three databases, PubMed, Embase, and Scopus, were searched from inception to March 15, 2024. Randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of spinal mobilization to conventional therapy were eligible for inclusion. Methodological quality was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale. Meta-analyses were performed to determine the effects of spinal mobilization. Nine randomized controlled trials were included, with a total of 294 patients with stroke. All included studies were evaluated as good or above for quality assessment. No adverse events related to spinal mobilization were reported. Compared to conventional therapy, spinal mobilization demonstrated significantly improved forward head posture (SMD: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.53 to 1.46, p < 0.001); there were no between-group differences on forced vital capacity (SMD: 0.44, 95% CI: -0.01 to 0.88, p = 0.06), forced expiratory volume (SMD: 0.33, 95% CI: -0.12 to 0.77, p = 0.15), balance (SMD: 0.36, 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.77, p = 0.08), gait speed (SMD: 0.48, 95% CI: -0.44 to 1.40, p = 0.31), and trunk function (SMD: 0.79, 95% CI: -0.17 to 1.75, p = 0.11). Cervical mobilization significantly improved forward head posture; however, no significant differences were found in other outcomes. Clinicians may consider spinal mobilization as an adjunctive intervention in stroke rehabilitation to address posture-related impairments to expand treatment strategy and optimize quality of care.

Evidence supporting type and dosage of joint mobilizations and rationale for selecting joint mobilization dosage for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain are limited.
This scoping review aimed to systematically map the type and dosage of joint mobilizations used in previous trials for managing patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain; and summarize the rationale for adopting a specific joint mobilization dosage.
We searched six databases. We included randomised controlled trials using joint mobilization for patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. We extracted data regarding technique, treatment joint mobilization dosages and rationale for a specific dosage.
We included 32 studies. Most studies did not or partially report technique (67%) and within-session dosage (64%) of passive joint mobilization. Overall treatment was fully reported in 95% of studies. The dosage used for passive joint mobilization was heterogeneous (ranging from grade I to grade V). Most studies (85%) did not or partially report technique of mobilization with movement (MWM), whereas within-session and overall treatment dosages were fully reported in more than 85% of studies. Three sets of 10 repetitions were commonly used within-session dosage for MWM. We found very limited information on the rationale for selecting dosage of joint mobilization.
We found limited information about the dosage or the rationale for selecting joint mobilization, with a heterogeneous dosage being tested across trials. Our findings highlight the importance of detailed reporting for dosage and rationale for selecting a specific dosage of joint mobilization.

This review aimed to investigate the effects of exercise and exercise with joint mobilization on shoulder range of motion (ROM) and subjective symptom recovery in patients with adhesive capsulitis (AC). Related Studies published from 2000 to 2021 that were peer-reviewed and for which pre-and post-values could be calculated were extracted from PubMed, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. Nine studies met our inclusion criteria. As a result of calculating the standard mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), both exercise and exercise with joint mobilization showed a large effect on shoulder ROM and subjective outcomes. The combination showed a more significant effect than exercise alone on shoulder flexion (SMD = -1.59 [-2.34, -0.65]), extension (SMD = -1.47 [-2.05, -0.89]), internal rotation (SMD = -1.77 [-2.17, -1.36], external rotation (SMD = -2.18 [-2.92, -1.44]), and abduction ROM (SMD = -1.99 [CI -3.86, -0.12]). Patients who performed exercise alone showed a higher effect of improvement in subjective function (SMD = 3.15 [2.06, 4.24]) and pain (SMD = 4.13 [1.86, 6.41]). Based on these results, an AC rehabilitation exercise program should be developed by adjusting the amount of exercise and joint mobilization by identifying the patient\'s needs, subjective symptoms, and ROM.

Frozen shoulder (FS) is a common condition affecting the population between the ages of 30 and 60; the causative agent is idiopathic, sedentary lifestyle, post-traumatic, or secondary to any pathological conditions. The pathology of FS is characterized by cytokine-mediated synovial inflammation with fibroblastic proliferation. The clinical features of FS vary depending on the phase in which the individual is present. The common clinical features are pain, and reduction in the range of motion in the capsular pattern. The available treatment options are medical therapy such as corticosteroid injection, physical therapy, joint mobilization, joint mobilization under anesthesia, and mirror therapy. When all the conservative methods fail then surgical procedures are used which include the surgical release of the restriction formed in the capsule. In conclusion, steroid injection along with physical therapy shows significant improvement in the range of motion and reduction in pain in the shoulder.

OBJECTIVE: Chronic foot pain constitutes a large portion of the chronic pain burden in the overall population. Plantar fasciitis is one of the most common and most easily identifiable causes of chronic foot pain. The syndrome has been estimated to cause 11 to 15% of foot pain visits, requiring professional care. Moreover, studies have suggested that 1 in 10 people will develop plantar fasciitis at some point in their life. Conservative management has been shown to be effective and considered first-line treatment. Minimally invasive treatment options are typically reserved for those who fail conservative management. With the advent of new techniques and improvements in current therapeutic options, there has been an expansion of available minimally invasive treatment options. The purpose of this review is to provide a comprehensive update on the current understanding of minimally invasive treatments of plantar fasciitis.
RESULTS: This review shows that conservative management continues to be the first-line therapy, whereas other treatment options were those who failed conservative management using modern techniques that have shown improving effectiveness, with successful restoration of patient functionality, recovery, and satisfaction. However, a multitude of these minimally invasive treatment options are evolving.
CONCLUSIONS: While conservative management continues to be the mainstay of treatment for plantar fasciitis, multiple minimally invasive treatment options are emerging with potential effectiveness in reducing pain and improving the function.

Background: Physiological responses related to manual therapy (MT) treatment have been investigated over decades using various animal models. However, these studies have not been compiled and their collective findings appraised. The purpose of this scoping review was to assess current scientific knowledge on the physiological responses related to MT and/or simulated MT procedures in animal models so as to act as a resource to better inform future mechanistic and clinical research incorporating these therapeutic interventions. Methods: PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane, Embase, and Index of Chiropractic Literature (ICL) were searched from database inception to August 2019. Eligible studies were: (a) published in English; (b) non-cadaveric animal-based; (c) original data studies; (d) included a form of MT or simulated MT as treatment; (e) included quantification of at least one delivery parameter of MT treatment; (f) quantification of at least one physiological measure that could potentially contribute to therapeutic mechanisms of action of the MT. MT studies were categorized according to three main intervention types: (1) mobilization; (2) manipulation; and (3) massage. Two-phase screening procedures were conducted by a pair of independent reviewers, data were extracted from eligible studies and qualitatively reported. Results: The literature search resulted in 231 articles of which 78 met inclusion criteria and were sorted by intervention type. Joint mobilization induced changes in nociceptive response and inflammatory profile, gene expression, receptor activation, neurotransmitter release and enzymatic activity. Spinal manipulation produced changes in muscle spindle response, nocifensive reflex response and neuronal activity, electromyography, and immunologic response. Physiological changes associated with massage therapy included autonomic, circulatory, lymphatic and immunologic functions, visceral response, gene expression, neuroanatomy, function and pathology, and cellular response to in vitro simulated massage. Conclusion: Pre-clinical research supports an association between MT physiological response and multiple potential short-term MT therapeutic mechanisms. Optimization of MT delivery and/or treatment efficacy will require additional preclinical investigation in which MT delivery parameters are controlled and reported using pathological and/or chronic pain models that mimic neuromusculoskeletal conditions for which MT has demonstrated clinical benefit.

METHODS: Systematic review.
BACKGROUND: No consensus exists as to which are the most effective methods to treat the symptoms associated with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET). Research has suggested that joint mobilizations may assist in the recovery of patients with LET.
OBJECTIVE: To determine if joint mobilizations are effective in improving pain, grip strength, and disability in adults with LET.
METHODS: Searches in 3 databases were performed to identify relevant clinical trials. Reviewers independently extracted data and assessed the methodological quality. Summary measures of quantitative data were extracted or calculated where possible. Appropriate data were pooled for meta-analysis using a random-effects model.
RESULTS: A total of 20 studies met the inclusion criteria; 7 were included in the meta-analysis. Studies were broadly classified into 3 groups: mobilization with movement (MWM), Mill\'s manipulation, and regional mobilization techniques. Pooled data across all time periods demonstrated a mean effect size of 0.43 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.15-0.71) for MWM on improving pain rating, and 0.31 (95% CI: 0.11-0.51) for MWM on improving grip strength, 0.47 (95% CI: 0.11-0.82) for Mill\'s manipulation on improving pain rating. A mean effect size of -0.01 (95% CI: -0.27 to -0.26) shows Mill\'s manipulation did not improve pain free grip strength. Functional outcomes varied considerably among studies. Pain, grip strength, and functional outcomes were improved with regional mobilizations.
CONCLUSIONS: There is compelling evidence that joint mobilizations have a positive effect on both pain and/or functional grip scores across all time frames compared to control groups in the management of LET.

Joint mobilizations are commonly used by clinicians to decrease pain and restore joint arthrokinematics following musculoskeletal injury. The force applied during a joint mobilization treatment is subjective to the individual clinician but may have an effect on patient outcomes. The purpose of this systematic review was to critically appraise and synthesize the studies which examined the reliability of clinicians\' force application during joint mobilization. A systematic search of PubMed and EBSCO Host databases from inception to March 1, 2013 was conducted to identify studies assessing the reliability of force application during joint mobilizations. Two reviewers utilized the Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies (QAREL) assessment tool to determine the quality of included studies. The relative reliability of the included studies was examined through intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) to synthesize study findings. All results were collated qualitatively with a level of evidence approach. A total of seven studies met the eligibility and were included. Five studies were included that assessed inter-clinician reliability, and six studies were included that assessed intra-clinician reliability. The overall level of evidence for inter-clinician reliability was strong for poor-to-moderate reliability (ICC = -0.04 to 0.70). The overall level of evidence for intra-clinician reliability was strong for good reliability (ICC = 0.75-0.99). This systematic review indicates there is variability in force application between clinicians but individual clinicians apply forces consistently. The results of this systematic review suggest innovative instructional methods are needed to improve consistency and validate the forces applied during of joint mobilization treatments. This is particularly evident for improving the consistency of force application across clinicians.