Shoulder joint mobilization is frequently used in physiotherapy to enhance joint function and neuromuscular control. However, its acute effects on muscle strength and proprioception remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate whether a single session of shoulder mobilization would acutely enhance shoulder strength and proprioception compared with a sham intervention. Forty-eight healthy university students (aged 18–25) were randomly assigned to either a mobilization group ( n = 24) or a sham group ( n = 24). The intervention group received passive glenohumeral joint mobilization (inferior, anterior, and posterior glides), while the sham group received simulated mobilization without mechanical input. Isometric shoulder muscle strength (flexion, abduction, internal/external rotation) was measured using a handheld dynamometer, and proprioception was assessed via a laser-assisted joint position reproduction (JPR) test. Baseline and immediate post-intervention assessments were conducted. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models. No significant group × time interaction effects were found for any strength or proprioception outcome (all p > 0.05). A non-significant trend toward improvement in shoulder proprioception over time was observed in both groups ( p = 0.103), but this was not specific to the mobilization intervention. No statistically significant main effects of group or time were detected for any muscle strength measures. A single session of shoulder joint mobilization did not produce statistically significant changes in muscle strength or proprioception in healthy individuals. These results indicate that immediate neuromuscular responses to mobilization are limited. Therapeutic benefits may require repeated applications or may be more evident in symptomatic individuals. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06910332. Registered on 28 March 2025. Last updated 11 September 2025. Ethics approval: Acıbadem University and Acıbadem Healthcare Institutions Medical Research Ethics Committee (ATADEK, approval no. 2025-04/185).
Acar et al. (Sat,) studied this question.