This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 36/8/1818    most recent 01.STR.0000177500.88994.9dv1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ada, L. Articles by Canning, C. G. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Ada, L. Articles by Canning, C. G. Related Collections Exercise/exercise testing/rehabilitation

(Stroke. 2005;36:1818.)
© 2005 American Heart Association, Inc.

Cochrane Corner

Supportive Devices for Preventing and Treating Subluxation of the Shoulder After Stroke

From the School of Physiotherapy (L.A.), the School of Physiotherapy (A.F.), and the School of Physiotherapy (C.G.C.), The University of Sydney, Australia.

Correspondence to Dr Louise Ada, School of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, PO Box 170, Lidcombe NSW 1825, Australia. Email L.Ada@fhs.usyd.edu.au

Section Editor: Graeme J. Hankey MD, FRCP

Key Words: rehabilitation • contracture • orthotic devices • shoulder pain • stroke • subluxation

An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.

	Background

 
Supportive devices such as slings, wheelchair attachments, and external shoulder orthoses have been used to treat subluxation of the shoulder after stroke. However, the efficacy of these devices has not been systematically investigated. The aim of this review was to investigate the effect of supportive devices (slings, wheelchair attachments, and external shoulder orthoses) in preventing subluxation, repositioning the head of the humerus in the glenoid fossa, decreasing pain, increasing function, and adversely increasing contracture in the shoulder after stroke.

	Methods

 
We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched on March 22, 2004). In addition, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to March 2004), CINAHL (1982 to March 2004), EMBASE (1974 to March 2004), AMED (1985 to March 2004) and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro, March 2004). We also hand-searched conference proceedings and contacted authors for additional information. Studies were included if they were: (1) randomized, quasi-randomized, or controlled trials; (2) participants had a clinical diagnosis of stroke; (3) intervention was the use of supportive devices; and (4) subluxation, pain, function, or contracture were measured as an outcome. Two independent reviewers examined the identified studies according to the inclusion criteria. Included studies were assessed for methodological quality and then categorized as either (1) supportive devices versus no supportive devices or (2) two supportive devices. Data were extracted and crosschecked.

	Results

 
We identified 4 trials (142 participants) that met the inclusion criteria. One low-quality trial examined the use of a hemisling . . . [Full Text of this Article]