Research article

Repetitive H-Wave^® device stimulation and program induces significant increases in the range of motion of post operative rotator cuff reconstruction in a double-blinded randomized placebo controlled human study

Kenneth Blum¹ , Amanda LC Chen² , Thomas JH Chen^{* 3} , Roger L Waite⁴ , B William Downs⁴ , Eric R Braverman⁶ , Mallory M Kerner⁶ , Stella M Savarimuthu⁶ and Nicholas DiNubile⁵

¹Department of Physiology & Pharmacology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston -Salem, North Carolina, USA

²Department of Engineering & Management of Advanced Technology, Chang Jung Christian University, Tainan, Taiwan, Republic of China

³Department of Occupational Health and Safety, Chang Jung Christian University, Tainan, Taiwan, Republic of China

⁴Department of Nutrigenomics, LifeGen, Inc. La Jolla, California, USA

⁵Orthopedic Surgeon, Havertown, Pennsylvania; and Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

⁶Department of Integrative Medicine, PATH Medical Clinics, and PATH Research Foundation, New York, New York, USA

author email corresponding author email* Contributed equally

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2009, 10:132doi:10.1186/1471-2474-10-132

Published:	29 October 2009

Abstract

Background

Albeit other prospective randomized controlled clinical trials on H-Wave Device Stimulation (HWDS), this is the first randomized double-blind Placebo controlled prospective study that assessed the effects of HWDS on range of motion and strength testing in patients who underwent rotator cuff reconstruction.

Methods

Twenty-two patients were randomly assigned into one of two groups: 1) H-Wave device stimulation (HWDS); 2) Sham-Placebo Device (PLACEBO). All groups received the same postoperative dressing and the same device treatment instructions. Group I was given HWDS which they were to utilize for one hour twice a day for 90 days postoperatively. Group II was given the same instructions with a Placebo device (PLACEBO). Range of motion was assessed by using one-way ANOVA with a Duncan Multiple Range Test for differences between the groups preoperatively, 45 days postoperatively, and 90 days postoperatively by using an active/passive scale for five basic ranges of motions: Forward Elevation, External Rotation (arm at side), External Rotation (arm at 90 degrees abduction), Internal Rotation (arm at side), and Internal Rotation (arm at 90 degrees abduction). The study also evaluated postoperative changes in strength by using the Medical Research Council (MRC) grade assessed strength testing.

Results

Patients who received HWDS compared to PLACEBO demonstrated, on average, significantly improved range of motion. Results confirm a significant difference for external rotation at 45 and 90 days postoperatively; active range at 45 days postoperatively (p = 0.007), active at 90 days postoperatively (p = 0.007). Internal rotation also demonstrated significant improvement compared to PLACEBO at 45 and 90 days postoperatively; active range at 45 days postoperatively (p = 0.007), and active range at 90 days postoperatively (p = 0.006). There was no significant difference between the two groups for strength testing.

Conclusion

HWDS compared to PLACEBO induces a significant increase in range of motion in positive management of rotator cuff reconstruction, supporting other previous research on HWDS and improvement in function. Interpretation of this preliminary investigation while suggestive of significant increases in Range of Motion of Post -Operative Rotator Cuff Reconstruction, warrants further confirmation in a larger double-blinded sham controlled randomized study.