THE THERAPIST (Journal of Therapies & Rehabilitation Sciences)

Association between Rotator Cuff Weakness and Shoulder Impingement Syndrome in Bowlers

2026-03-25T07:54:07+00:00

The rotator cuff comprises four muscles and their associated tendons, which function together to support the ball (head) of the upper arm bone (humerus) in the shoulder joint and allow for fluid movement and rotation of the shoulder. Because of the repeated overhead motion involved with bowling, many bowlers develop a common shoulder injury, shoulder impingement syndrome (SIS), due to overuse and/or "overloading" these structures in their shoulders. SIS occurs when the rotator cuff tendons or the bursa sac that surrounds them become compressed/irritated, resulting in pain, inflammation, and restricted shoulder function. Objective: To find out the association between rotator cuff weaknesses and shoulder impingement syndrome. Methods: Data were collected from fast bowlers at the University of Lahore, Lahore Gymkhana, Minhaj College Sports Club, and various cricket clubs and academies across Lahore. A total of 77 bowlers aged 20–35 years were selected through convenience sampling. Players with recent shoulder injuries, rotator cuff tears, or neurological conditions were excluded. Results: All the participants were male. Shoulder impingement was assessed using the Neer test, with 28 bowlers testing positive, all of whom exhibited severe Rotator cuff weakness and shoulder impingement syndrome among bowlers. Conclusions: A high prevalence of SIS was observed among fast bowlers due to the physical nature of the action. SIS can be minimized by improving the strength of the shoulder, using correct technique, and resting. Additional research should be undertaken to develop specific preventative and rehabilitation programs for fast bowlers.

Exploring Allied Health Therapists’ Perceptions of Telehealth: Benefits, Barriers, Clinical Impact, and Intentions for Continued Use

2026-06-23T06:32:35+00:00

Post-COVID-19, telehealth has become widely adopted in allied health professions, and therapists' attitudes toward the viability and efficacy of telehealth are poorly understood, not specific to any particular discipline, and vary. Objectives: To evaluate allied health therapists' perceptions of telehealth by assessing its adoption, perceived benefits and barriers, and the influence of training and professional experience on attitudes toward telehealth use and future implementation using a convergent mixed-methods cross-sectional approach. Methods: A convergent mixed-methods cross-sectional design was conducted with 100 therapists from Speech-Language Therapy, Rehabilitation, Psychology, Physical Therapy, and Occupational Therapy to explore perceptions of telehealth. The participants answered 12 five-point Likert scale questionnaires and an open-ended question about the perceived benefits and challenges. Sample size was calculated using Cohen's power formula. The data distributions were not normal, and therefore non-parametric statistics were used (Spearman's correlation, Kruskal-Wallis). Results: Adoption was high (88%); 58% reported using telehealth at least weekly, but 48% did not get any formal training, and 53% planned to keep using it. Technology confidence was moderately high (mean = 4.02/5), perceived access benefits were moderately high (mean = 3.81), and the lowest was patient comfort (mean = 3.44). The reported benefits were significantly correlated with agreement that telehealth decreases geographic barriers (ρ = 0.322, p=0.001). Conclusions: Results highlight the critical need for structured training, enhanced platforms, and patient support in order to maintain the integration of telehealth across allied health professions in an uninterrupted fashion.

The Rise of Acellular Regenerative Aesthetics: Are Exosomes Replacing Stem Cells?

2026-07-17T05:00:28+00:00

It is not only the discovery of new therapies but also the understanding of how the existing therapies work those results in the advancement of science. Regenerative aesthetics shifted in the last decade from stem cells to the biological messages they deliver. Just a few years back, the discussion of scientific meetings revolved around stem cells, their isolation methods, differentiation potential, and tissue regeneration. Today, the talk has markedly changed. A question has arisen: does the therapeutic value of stem cells lie in the cells themselves or in the biological messengers they produce? [1]. This change has pushed exosomes from relative anonymity to the forefront of regenerative medicine.

As clinicians, this study witnessing an unprecedented rise in interest in acellular therapies. Not only are scientific publications increasing exponentially, but the market is also bombarded with commercial products, and most importantly, patients are becoming familiar with terminology that is confined to research laboratories. This enthusiasm raised a question: Are exosomes replacing stem cells?

The answer to it is perhaps very simple and even more interesting than the question itself.

Exosomes are not replacing stem cells. Instead, they are adding it to our understanding of how stem cells can achieve their therapeutic results. Mesenchymal stem cells were believed to repair tissues by trans differentiation and engraftment, but gradually, through research, it was found that they survive for a short period of time after transplantation, yet the effects of their therapeutics persist longer. This finding shifted research more towards secretomes-the collection of complex bioactive molecules released in the surrounding environment. Exosomes among these bioactive molecules gain particular attention as communicators. They influence cellular behavior, regulate the immune and inflammatory system, promote angiogenesis, collagen, and elastic fiber deposition [2].

Exosomes can be regarded as the molecular language through which stem cells communicate. I would rather say they keep certain codes of “Regenerative Language”. This concept led to a rise in acellular regenerative medicine. Stem cell transplantation is being replaced by delivering biological signals. This seems quite captivating. Stem cell treatment is scientifically very convincing, but the regulatory and logistic challenges associated with cell harvesting, expansion, transport, storage requirements, donor variability, and the costs all complicate the bedside stem cell treatment [3]. On the other side, exosome treatment can overcome many of these limitations. Exosomes can permit standardized manufacturing; they are less immunogenic, easy to store, and cannot proliferate [1, 2].

They are being used for skin rejuvenation, androgenic alopecia, acne scars, wound healing, and pigmentary disorders in dermatology [4]. They can be combined with procedures like laser resurfacing, microneedling, and fat grafting.

The greatest challenge, despite all these facts, is the gap between scientific evidence and commercial marketing. The word “exosome” has actually become more of a marketing term applied to a lot of products that are biologically entirely different, for example, conditioned media, heterogeneous extracellular vesicles and many inadequately characterized preparations. There is not only a lack of standardization in nomenclature but also in purification methods, dosage, storage, potency, and optimal donor selection. Randomized clinical trials are scarce. Therefore, a cautious approach is being adopted by regulatory authorities. To date, exosomes have not received approval from the FDA for cosmetic indications. This is important because regulatory approvals and scientific promises cannot be confused [2].

The most important misconception in the current situation is the way stem cells and exosomes are portrayed as competitors. They are actually at different positions in the same biological continuum. Stem cells cannot be replaced with exosome treatment in terms of tissue replacement, structural regeneration, or cellular repopulation. The future of regenerative medicine is not choosing one over the other; instead, it’s applying each where it is biologically appropriate.

Engineered exosomes seem to be the future, where a combination of nanotechnology and artificial intelligence-assisted therapeutic designs is tailored to individual patients. Researchers can develop customized extracellular vesicles that can deliver selected microRNA, messenger RNA, and gene editing molecules with great precision. These innovations can reshape the whole of regenerative medicine.

As clinicians, study not only to embrace the innovation but also to commit to scientific evidence and the patient’s safety. New technologies always pass through an era of enthusiasm before finding their right place.

In medicine, true progress doesn’t occur by replacing one discovery over the other but the actual progress occurs by deeper biological understanding. Exosomes have not diminished the importance of stem cells but revealed the mechanism for their therapeutic achievements. The future of regenerative aesthetics, therefore, may not belong to cellular or acellular therapies alone, but to the integration of therapies guided by evidence, innovation, and an unconditional commitment to patient safety [6].