Are the results of our study clinically important? While the differences between groups for shoulder function (ie, the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index) were significant at 1 and 3 months, in favour of the experimental group, the confidence intervals spanned the reported minimum clinically important differences of 8.0% to 13.2% (Paul et al 2004, Schmitt and Di Fabio 2004) and therefore their clinical importance is not absolutely certain. However, these minimum clinically important differences were calculated for a different patient population and thus may not be generalisable to post-thoracotomy patients. The mean difference in favour Protein Tyrosine Kinase inhibitor of the

experimental group at discharge for shoulder pain (1.3 units) was significant and exceeded the minimum clinically important difference of 1.1 units for pain numerical rating scales (Mintken et al 2009). This suggests the difference between groups at discharge was clinically important, however, the confidence interval included smaller benefits than this, so we cannot be certain that this result is clinically worthwhile. While no significant between-group differences were found for the quality of life summary scores,

the experimental group’s physical component score Selleckchem Alpelisib at 3 months was 4.8 points higher than the control group’s score, which exceeds the minimum clinically important difference of 3 points noted by Swigris and colleagues (2010). However, given that the confidence intervals widely spanned the minimum clinically important difference for the physical component summary scores, this warrants further investigation. The differences between groups for all range of motion and strength Non-specific serine/threonine protein kinase measures were small, statistically non-significant, and below the likely minimum clinically important differences. However, of note, most of the results for range of motion had confidence intervals that extended well into what would be considered a beneficial range, and, importantly, essentially excluded the possibility of clinically meaningful harm resulting

from the experimental intervention. In summary, a physiotherapy exercise program provides some benefits such as early relief of pain, shoulder function and, perhaps, the physical components of quality of life. Further investigation could more precisely determine the clinical worth of these effects. Based on these findings, we recommend that physiotherapists provide an inpatient postoperative exercise program aimed at reducing shoulder dysfunction and pain, incorporating progressive shoulder and thoracic cage mobility exercises and an associated home-based discharge program. There are a number of factors which mean caution should be used when extrapolating our findings to other centres. Factors unique to our unit (eg, ethnicity, clinical pathway) may have influenced our results.