Digital vs. conventional physical therapy for chronic shoulder pain

Study overview

Chronic shoulder pain can be difficult to manage, and many patients face barriers to accessing consistent in-person physical therapy. This randomized controlled trial compared fully remote digital physical therapy with conventional in-person physical therapy for chronic shoulder pain.

The study included 82 participants referred for outpatient physical therapy. Participants were randomized to either an 8-week digital intervention or conventional in-person physical therapy. The digital intervention combined home exercise, education, cognitive behavioral therapy, movement biofeedback, and asynchronous physical therapist monitoring.

Key findings

Digital and conventional physical therapy produced comparable recovery

The study found that the digital program promoted similar levels of recovery compared with conventional in-person physical therapy for chronic shoulder pain.

The study tested a fully remote model against in-person care

This was not simply a single-arm outcomes study. It directly compared digital care with conventional physical therapy in a randomized design, strengthening the clinical evidence.

Engagement supported remote delivery

The digital program used movement biofeedback and asynchronous monitoring to guide care remotely. The findings support the feasibility of delivering shoulder rehabilitation outside the clinic.

The study helps establish digital care for a complex condition

Chronic shoulder pain can involve varied diagnoses and movement limitations. Demonstrating comparable outcomes in this condition strengthens the case for digital physical therapy across upper-extremity MSK care.

Why this study matters

This study is a key comparative effectiveness page for Sword. It shows that fully remote digital physical therapy can be evaluated against conventional in-person care for chronic shoulder pain and deliver comparable outcomes.

For clinical audiences, the study is important because it uses a randomized design. For organizations evaluating access, it supports a model that may make high-quality shoulder care more available without relying entirely on in-person visits.

Read the full study