EFFECTIVENESS OF SPENCER VS. MAITLAND MOBILIZATION TECHNIQUES INTEGRATED WITH DRY NEEDLING AND CONVENTIONAL PHYSIOTHERAPY IN TREATING ADHESIVE CAPSULITIS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

Abstract

BACKGROUND
Adhesive capsulitis, commonly known as frozen shoulder, is a painful musculoskeletal condition characterized by progressive pain, stiffness,
and restricted active and passive range of motion of the glenohumeral joint. It commonly affects individuals between 40 and 60 years of age
and significantly interferes with activities of daily living, occupational performance, and overall quality of life. Conserva tive physiotherapy
interventions, including manual therapy, dry needling, therapeutic exercises, and electrotherapy, are widely used to improve pain and restore
shoulder function. However, limited evidence is available comparing Spencer and Maitland mobilization techniques when combine d with dry
needling and conventional physiotherapy.
AIM
To compare the effectiveness of Spencer Mobilization Technique versus Maitland Mobilization Technique integrated with dry nee dling and
conventional physiotherapy in patients with adhesive capsulitis.
OBJECTIVES
• To evaluate the effect of Spencer Mobilization with dry needling and conventional physiotherapy on pain, shoulder range of
motion, and functional disability.
• To evaluate the effect of Maitland Mobilization with dry needling and conventional physiotherapy on pain, shoulder range of
motion, and functional disability.
• To compare the outcomes between the two intervention groups.
METHODOLOGY
A comparative experimental study was conducted on 30 participants diagnosed with adhesive capsulitis who met the inclusion and exclusion
criteria. Participants were randomly allocated into two groups of 15 each.
• Group A: Spencer Mobilization + Dry Needling + Conventional Physiotherapy.
• Group B: Maitland Mobilization + Dry Needling + Conventional Physiotherapy.
The intervention was administered over the prescribed treatment period. Outcome measures included the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for
pain, the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) for functional disability, and goniometric measurement of shoulder ra nge of motion
(flexion, abduction, and external rotation). Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, including paired and independent t-
tests, with a significance level of p < 0.05.
RESULTS
Both intervention groups demonstrated statistically significant improvements in pain, shoulder range of motion, and functiona l disability
following treatment (p < 0.05). Comparison between the groups indicated that the Spencer Mobilization group showed greater improvement in
shoulder range of motion and SPADI scores, while both groups achieved comparable reductions in pain intensity. These findings suggest that
integrating manual therapy, dry needling, and conventional physiotherapy is effective in the rehabilitation of adhesive capsulitis.
CONCLUSION
Both Spencer Mobilization and Maitland Mobilization, when combined with dry needling and conventional physiotherapy, are effective
treatment approaches for patients with adhesive capsulitis. However, Spencer Mobilization demonstrated comparatively greater improvement
in shoulder mobility and functional recovery. A multimodal physiotherapy program incorporating manual therapy, dry needling, and therapeutic
exercise may therefore be recommended for the conservative management of adhesive capsulitis.