The effectiveness of graded motor imagery training on pain and functionality in patients with subacromial pain syndrome: A prospective,single-blind,randomized controlled trial
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online April, 2026
The effectiveness of graded motor imagery training on pain and functionality in patients with subacromial pain syndrome: A prospective,single-blind,randomized controlled trial
Pain from subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS) can limit individuals' daily activities and reduce physical performance. The effectiveness of graded motor imagery (GMI) training for this condition remains unexplored. This prospective, randomized controlled trial aimed to determine the effects of GMI training in patients with chronic painful SAPS.
Methods
Forty-two patients with SAPS were randomly assigned to the GMI (n = 21) and the control (n = 21) groups. Primary measures were the visual analogue scale (VAS), and the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. Secondary measures were Active Range of Motion (AROM), muscle strength, lateralization performance and Kinesthetic and Visual Imagery Questionnaire (KVIQ). Evaluations occurred at baseline, postintervention (6 weeks), and after a 6-week follow up.
Results
The GMI group showed significantly greater improvements in both primary and secondary outcomes compared to the control group (p < 0.001). Significantly larger effect sizes were found in favor of the GMI group for VAS, DASH, abduction, external rotation AROM, muscle strength, lateralization performance, and KVIQ (ηp2 > 0.14, p < 0.05, for all).
Conclusions
The integration of GMI training into conventional physiotherapy for SAPS rehabilitation provides more effective clinical results in improving pain intensity and increasing functionality.
LudewigPMCookTM. Alterations in shoulder kinematics and associated muscle activity in people with symptoms of shoulder impingement. Phys Ther2000; 80: 276–291.
2.
BandholmTRasmussenLAagaardP, et al.Force steadiness, muscle activity, and maximal muscle strength in subjects with subacromial impingement syndrome. Muscle Nerve2006; 34: 631–639.
3.
Arendt-Nielsen L and Graven-NielsenT. Translational musculoskeletal pain research. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol2011; 25: 209–226.
4.
DeanBJGwilymSECarrAJ. Why does my shoulder hurt? A review of the neuroanatomical and biochemical basis of shoulder pain. Br J Sports Med2013; 47: 1095–1104.
5.
WoolfCJ. Central sensitization: implications for the diagnosis and treatment of pain. Pain2011; 152: s2–s15.
6.
BorstadJWoesteC. The role of sensitization in musculoskeletal shoulder pain. Braz J Phys Ther2015; 19: 251–257.
7.
SanchisMNLluchENijsJ, et al.The role of central sensitization in shoulder pain: a systematic literature review. Semin Arthritis Rheum2015; 44: 710–716.
8.
PaulTMSoo HooJChaeJ, et al.Central hypersensitivity in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2012; 93: 2206–2209.
9.
MoseleyGL. Graded motor imagery for pathologic pain: a randomized controlled trial. Neurology2006; 67: 2129–2134.
10.
Méndez-RebolledoGGatica-RojasVTorres-CuecoR, et al.Update on the effects of graded motor imagery and mirror therapy on complex regional pain syndrome type 1: a systematic review. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil2017; 30: 441–449.
11.
MoseleyGL. Is successful rehabilitation of complex regional pain syndrome due to sustained attention to the affected limb? A randomised clinical trial. Pain2005; 114: 54–61.
12.
YapBWDLimECW. The effects of motor imagery on pain and range of motion in musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review using meta-analysis. Clin J Pain2019; 35: 87–99.
13.
HoyekNDi RienzoFColletC, et al.The therapeutic role of motor imagery on the functional rehabilitation of a stage II shoulder impingement syndrome. Disabil Rehabil2014; 36: 1113–1119.
14.
BreckenridgeJDMcAuleyJHMoseleyGL, et al.Is implicit motor imagery altered in people with shoulder pain? The shoulder left/right judgement task. Musculoskelet Sci Pract2020; 48: 102159. [published correction appears in Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2021;51:102280. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msksp.2020.102280]. Musculoskelet Sci Pract 2020; 48: 102159.
15.
MoseleyGL. Graded motor imagery is effective for long-standing complex regional pain syndrome: a randomised controlled trial. Pain2004; 108: 192–198.
16.
CandiriBTaluBGunerE, et al.The effect of graded motor imagery training on pain, functional performance, motor imagery skills, and kinesiophobia after total knee arthroplasty: randomized controlled trial. Korean J Pain2023; 36: 369–381.
17.
BirinciTKaya MutluEAltunS. The efficacy of graded motor imagery in post-traumatic stiffness of elbow: a randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2022; 31: 2147–2156.
18.
Araya-QuintanillaFGutiérrez-EspinozaHJesús Muñoz-YanezM, et al.The short-term effect of graded motor imagery on the affective components of pain in subjects with chronic shoulder pain syndrome: Open-label single-arm prospective study. Pain Med2020; 21: 2496–2501.
19.
FolsteinMFFolsteinSEMcHughPR. “Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res1975; 12: 189–198.
20.
MichaleffZAKamperSJ. PEDro systematic review update: the effectiveness of physiotherapy exercises in subacromical impingement syndrome. Br J Sports Med2013; 47: 927–928.
21.
KinsellaRPizzariT. Electromyographic activity of the shoulder muscles during rehabilitation exercises in subjects with and without subacromial pain syndrome: a systematic review. Shoulder Elbow2017; 9: 112–126.
22.
Doiron-CadrinPLafranceSSaulnierM, et al.Shoulder rotator cuff disorders: a systematic review of clinical practice guidelines and semantic analyses of recommendations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2020; 101: 1233–1242.
23.
MoseleyGLButlerDSBeamesTB, et al.The graded motor imagery handbook. Adelaide: NOI Group Publications, 2012.
24.
WajonA. Recognise™ hands app for graded motor imagery training in chronic pain. J Physiother2014; 60: 117.
25.
BoonstraAMSchiphorst PreuperHRRenemanMF, et al.Reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale for disability in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Int J Rehabil Res2008; 31: 165–169.
26.
TashjianRZDeloachJPorucznikCA, et al.Minimal clinically important differences (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for visual analog scales (VAS) measuring pain in patients treated for rotator cuff disease. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2009; 18: 927–932.
27.
HudakPLAmadioPCBombardierC.Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med1996; 29: 602–608. [published correction appears in Am J Ind Med 1996 Sep;30(3):372]. Am J Ind Med 1996; 29(6): 602–608.
28.
DügerTYakutEÖksüzÇ, et al.Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand-DASH) questionnaire. Fizyoter Rehabil2006; 17: 99–107.
29.
FranchignoniFVercelliSGiordanoA, et al.Minimal clinically important difference of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand outcome measure (DASH) and its shortened version (QuickDASH). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther2014; 44: 30–39.
30.
MullaneyMJMcHughMPJohnsonCP, et al.Reliability of shoulder range of motion comparing a goniometer to a digital level. Physiother Theory Pract2010; 26: 327–333.
31.
VermeulenHMde BockGHvan HouwelingenHC, et al.A comparison of two portable dynamometers in the assessment of shoulder and elbow strength. Physiotherapy2005; 91: 101–12.
32.
MalouinFRichardsCLJacksonPL, et al.The Kinesthetic and Visual Imagery Questionnaire (KVIQ) for assessing motor imagery in persons with physical disabilities: a reliability and construct validity study. J Neurol Phys Ther2007; 31: 20–29.
33.
DilekBAydanÇYakutY. Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Kinesthetic and Visual Imagery Questionnaire-20. J Exerc Ther Rehabil2019; 6: 201–210.
34.
KamperSJMaherCGMackayG. Global rating of change scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses and considerations for design. J Man Manip Ther2009; 17: 163–170.
35.
RichardsonJTE. Eta squared and partial eta squared as measures of effect size in educational research. Educ Res Rev2011; 6: 135–47.
36.
Suso-MartíLLa ToucheRAngulo-Díaz-ParreñoS, et al.Effectiveness of motor imagery and action observation training on musculoskeletal pain intensity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Pain2020; 24: 886–901.
37.
RyanDFullenBRioE, et al.Effect of action observation therapy in the rehabilitation of neurologic and musculoskeletal conditions: a systematic review. Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl2021; 3: 100106.
38.
LimakatsoKCashinAGWilliamsS, et al.The efficacy of graded motor imagery and its components on phantom limb pain and disability: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Pain2023; 7: 2188899.
39.
YasaciZCelikD. Does integration of graded motor imagery training augment the efficacy of a multimodal physiotherapy program for patients with frozen shoulder? A randomized controlled trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res2024; 483: 707–716.
40.
GurudutPGodseAN. Effectiveness of graded motor imagery in subjects with frozen shoulder: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Korean J Pain2022; 35: 152–159.
41.
HekimÖÇolakTKBonabMAR. The effect of mirror therapy in patients with frozen shoulder. Shoulder Elbow2023; 15: 218–227.
42.
BoweringKJO'ConnellNETaborA, et al.The effects of graded motor imagery and its components on chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Pain2013; 14: 3–13.
43.
AlschulerKNTheisen-GoodvichMEHaigAJ, et al.A comparison of the relationship between depression, perceived disability, and physical performance in persons with chronic pain. Eur J Pain2008; 12: 757–764.
