Combined Multimodal Therapies for Chronic Tennis Elbow: Pilot Study to Test Protocols for a Randomized Clinical Trial

Manual therapy and exercise for lateral elbow pain

BACKGROUND

Manual therapy and prescribed exercises are often provided together or separately in contemporary clinical practice to treat people with lateral elbow pain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and harms of manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both for adults with lateral elbow pain.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the databases CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase, and trial registries until 31 January 2024, unrestricted by language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised trials. Participants were adults with lateral elbow pain. Interventions were manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both. Primary comparators were placebo or minimal or no intervention. We also included comparisons of manual therapy and prescribed exercises with either intervention alone, with or without glucocorticoid injection. Exclusions were trials testing a single application of an intervention or comparison of different types of manual therapy or prescribed exercises.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted trial characteristics and numerical data, and assessed study risk of bias and certainty of evidence using GRADE. The main comparisons were manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both compared with placebo treatment, and with minimal or no intervention. Major outcomes were pain, disability, heath-related quality of life, participant-reported treatment success, participant withdrawals, adverse events and serious adverse events. The primary endpoint was end of intervention for pain, disability, health-related quality of life and participant-reported treatment success and final time point for adverse events and withdrawals.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-three trials (1612 participants) met our inclusion criteria (mean age ranged from 38 to 52 years, 47% female, 70% dominant arm affected). One trial (23 participants) compared manual therapy to placebo manual therapy, 12 trials (1124 participants) compared manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both to minimal or no intervention, six trials (228 participants) compared manual therapy and exercise to exercise alone, one trial (60 participants) compared the addition of manual therapy to prescribed exercises and glucocorticoid injection, and four trials (177 participants) assessed the addition of manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both to glucocorticoid injection. Twenty-one trials without placebo control were susceptible to performance and detection bias as participants were not blinded to the intervention. Other biases included selection (nine trials, 39%, including two quasi-randomised), attrition (eight trials, 35%) and selective reporting (15 trials, 65%) biases. We report the results of the main comparisons. Manual therapy versus placebo manual therapy Low-certainty evidence, based upon a single trial (23 participants) and downgraded due to indirectness and imprecision, indicates manual therapy may reduce pain and elbow disability at the end of two to three weeks of treatment. Mean pain at the end of treatment was 4.1 points with placebo (0 to 10 scale) and 2.0 points with manual therapy, MD -2.1 points (95% CI -4.2 to -0.1). Mean disability was 40 points with placebo (0 to 100 scale) and 15 points with manual therapy, MD -25 points (95% CI -43 to -7). There was no follow-up beyond the end of treatment to show if these effects were sustained, and no other major outcomes were reported. Manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both versus minimal intervention Low-certainty evidence indicates manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both may slightly reduce pain and disability at the end of treatment, but the effects were not sustained, and there may be little to no improvement in health-related quality of life or number of participants reporting treatment success. We downgraded the evidence due to increased risk of performance bias and detection bias across all the trials, and indirectness due to the multimodal nature of the interventions included in the trials. At four weeks to three months, mean pain was 5.10 points with minimal treatment and manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both reduced pain by a MD of -0.53 points (95% CI -0.92 to -0.14, I2 = 43%; 12 trials, 1023 participants). At four weeks to three months, mean disability was 63.8 points with minimal or no treatment and manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both reduced disability by a MD of -5.00 points (95% CI -9.22 to -0.77, I2 = 63%; 10 trials, 732 participants). At four weeks to three months, mean quality of life was 73.04 points with minimal treatment on a 0 to 100 scale and prescribed exercises reduced quality of life by a MD of -5.58 points (95% CI -10.29 to -0.99; 2 trials, 113 participants). Treatment success was reported by 42% of participants with minimal or no treatment and 57.1% of participants with manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both, RR 1.36 (95% CI 0.96 to 1.93, I2 = 73%; 6 trials, 770 participants). We are uncertain if manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both results in more withdrawals or adverse events. There were 83/566 participant withdrawals (147 per 1000) from the minimal or no intervention group, and 77/581 (126 per 1000) from the manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both groups, RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.66 to 1.12, I2 = 0%; 12 trials). Adverse events were mild and transient and included pain, bruising and gastrointestinal events, and no serious adverse events were reported. Adverse events were reported by 19/224 (85 per 1000) in the minimal treatment group and 70/233 (313 per 1000) in the manual therapy, prescribed exercises or both groups, RR 3.69 (95% CI 0.98 to 13.97, I2 = 72%; 6 trials).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-certainty evidence from a single trial in people with lateral elbow pain indicates that, compared with placebo, manual therapy may provide a clinically worthwhile benefit in terms of pain and disability at the end of treatment, although the 95% confidence interval also includes both an important improvement and no improvement, and the longer-term outcomes are unknown. Low-certainty evidence from 12 trials indicates that manual therapy and exercise may slightly reduce pain and disability at the end of treatment, but this may not be clinically worthwhile and these benefits are not sustained. While pain after treatment was an adverse event from manual therapy, the number of events was too small to be certain.

Exercise therapy for tendinopathy: a mixed-methods evidence synthesis exploring feasibility, acceptability and effectiveness

Background

Tendinopathy is a common, painful and functionally limiting condition, primarily managed conservatively using exercise therapy.

Review questions

(i) What exercise interventions have been reported in the literature for which tendinopathies? (ii) What outcomes have been reported in studies investigating exercise interventions for tendinopathy? (iii) Which exercise interventions are most effective across all tendinopathies? (iv) Does type/location of tendinopathy or other specific covariates affect which are the most effective exercise therapies? (v) How feasible and acceptable are exercise interventions for tendinopathies?

Methods

A scoping review mapped exercise interventions for tendinopathies and outcomes reported to date (questions i and ii). Thereafter, two contingent systematic review workstreams were conducted. The first investigated a large number of studies and was split into three efficacy reviews that quantified and compared efficacy across different interventions (question iii), and investigated the influence of a range of potential moderators (question iv). The second was a convergent segregated mixed-method review (question v). Searches for studies published from 1998 were conducted in library databases (n = 9), trial registries (n = 6), grey literature databases (n = 5) and Google Scholar. Scoping review searches were completed on 28 April 2020 with efficacy and mixed-method search updates conducted on 19 January 2021 and 29 March 2021.

Results

Scoping review - 555 included studies identified a range of exercise interventions and outcomes across a range of tendinopathies, most commonly Achilles, patellar, lateral elbow and rotator cuff-related shoulder pain. Strengthening exercise was most common, with flexibility exercise used primarily in the upper limb. Disability was the most common outcome measured in Achilles, patellar and rotator cuff-related shoulder pain; physical function capacity was most common in lateral elbow tendinopathy. Efficacy reviews - 204 studies provided evidence that exercise therapy is safe and beneficial, and that patients are generally satisfied with treatment outcome and perceive the improvement to be substantial. In the context of generally low and very low-quality evidence, results identified that: (1) the shoulder may benefit more from flexibility (effect sizeResistance:Flexibility = 0.18 [95% CrI 0.07 to 0.29]) and proprioception (effect sizeResistance:Proprioception = 0.16 [95% CrI -1.8 to 0.32]); (2) when performing strengthening exercise it may be most beneficial to combine concentric and eccentric modes (effect sizeEccentricOnly:Concentric+Eccentric = 0.48 [95% CrI -0.13 to 1.1]; and (3) exercise may be most beneficial when combined with another conservative modality (e.g. injection or electro-therapy increasing effect size by ≈0.1 to 0.3). Mixed-method review - 94 studies (11 qualitative) provided evidence that exercise interventions for tendinopathy can largely be considered feasible and acceptable, and that several important factors should be considered when prescribing exercise for tendinopathy, including an awareness of potential barriers to and facilitators of engaging with exercise, patients' and providers' prior experience and beliefs, and the importance of patient education, self-management and the patient-healthcare professional relationship.

Limitations

Despite a large body of literature on exercise for tendinopathy, there are methodological and reporting limitations that influenced the recommendations that could be made.

Conclusion

The findings provide some support for the use of exercise combined with another conservative modality; flexibility and proprioception exercise for the shoulder; and a combination of eccentric and concentric strengthening exercise across tendinopathies. However, the findings must be interpreted within the context of the quality of the available evidence.

Future work

There is an urgent need for high-quality efficacy, effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and qualitative research that is adequately reported, using common terminology, definitions and outcomes.

Study registration

This project is registered as DOI: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00175 (scoping review); PROSPERO CRD 42020168187 (efficacy reviews); https://osf.io/preprints/sportrxiv/y7sk6/ (efficacy review 1); https://osf.io/preprints/sportrxiv/eyxgk/ (efficacy review 2); https://osf.io/preprints/sportrxiv/mx5pv/ (efficacy review 3); PROSPERO CRD42020164641 (mixed-method review).

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) HTA programme and will be published in full in HTA Journal; Vol. 27, No. 24. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Analgesic and Functional Efficiency of High-Voltage Electrical Stimulation in Patients with Lateral Epicondylitis-A Report with a 180-Day Follow-Up

The available publications describing the beneficial effects of electrostimulation does not unequivocally confirm the clinical utility of high-voltage electrical stimulation (HVES) in the treatment of the lateral epicondylitis (LE). The aim of this study was the estimation of the effect of HVES on pain intensity and functional efficiency, both in the short and long term in patients with LE. The trial was registered by the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621001389897). There were 58 patients allocated into two groups: the HVES group (n = 29, mean age 49.9 ± 11.0 years), treated with HVES (pulse duration: 200μs, frequency: 100 Hz, current amplitude in the range of 18-25 mA, voltage amplitude: 100 V), and the NORM group (n = 29, mean age 48.0 ± 12.6 years), who were healthy and untreated patients. The treatments were performed 5 days a week (from Monday to Friday) for two weeks. Treatment progress was measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS) for rest pain, night pain, and pain during activity; the Laitinen Pain Scale (LPS); and hand grip strength (HGS) before and after the treatment, as well as after 3, 6, 12, and 24 weeks. The reduction of pain (according to the VAS and LPS) and increase in the functional condition (according to the HGS) were observed in all HVES patients in the short- and long-term observation. Therefore, the HVES in treatment of LE was found to be effective and safe.

Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) clinical practice guidelines on the management of lateral epicondylitis of the humerus - Secondary publication

BACKGROUND

The guidelines presented herein provide recommendations for the management of patients with lateral epicondylitis of the humerus. These recommendations are endorsed by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) and Japan Elbow Society.

METHODS

The JOA lateral epicondylitis guideline committee revised the previous guidelines on the basis of the "Medical Information Network Distribution Service Handbook for Clinical Practice Guideline Development 2014", which emphasized the importance of the balance between benefit and harm, and proposed a desirable method for preparing clinical guidelines in Japan. These guidelines consist of 11 clinical questions (CQs), 9 background questions (BQs), and 3 future research questions (FRQs). For each CQ, outcomes from the literature were collected and evaluated systematically according to the adopted study design.

RESULTS

The committee proposed recommendations for each CQ by determining the level of evidence and assessing the consensus rate. Physical therapy was the best recommendation with the best evidence. The BQs and FRQs were answered by collecting evidence based on the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

The guidelines presented herein were reviewed systematically, and recommendations were proposed for each CQ. These guidelines are expected to be widely used not only by surgeons or physicians but also by other healthcare providers, such as nurses, therapists, and athletic trainers.

Musculoskeletal ultrasonographic evaluation of perineural injection therapy versus therapeutic ultrasound in chronic lateral epicondylitis

Background

Lateral epicondylitis (LE) is a common disorder causing pain and functional limitations especially in athletes and manual workers. There is a growing interest in regenerative injection therapies in chronic LE. One of those suggested is perineural injection (PNI) therapy. The present study aims to find out the efficacy of PNI therapy in the treatment of chronic LE as compared to therapeutic ultrasound (TUS) and to detect if any changes have happened after treatment to the common extensor tendon (CEO) as detected by diagnostic ultrasound (US) examination.

Results

Statistical analysis between the 2 groups at the start of the study as regards age, sex, and clinical parameters including visual analog scale (VAS), tenderness grading scale, and Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) Questionnaire revealed a non-significant difference between both groups (p > 0.05). After 12 weeks, within-group analysis showed significant improvement in all clinical outcome measures in both groups compared to the initial assessment.

Between-group analysis after 12 weeks showed that the tenderness grading scale and PRTEE score had more significant improvement in the PNI therapy group. However, the two groups were comparable regarding VAS. Within-group US evaluation at the 12th week post-treatment showed a highly significant decrease in hypoechoic areas (p < 0.001) and a decrease in distributed fibrillar pattern in PNI group, while the TUS group demonstrated a significant decrease in hypoechoic areas and tendon thickness (p < 0.005). Between-group US evaluation after 12 weeks showed no significant difference in all assessed US parameters. No complications were observed in both groups.

Conclusions

A short-term follow-up regimen of 1 session/week of PNI therapy is significantly more effective than 3 sessions/week of TUS regarding the improvement of pain and functional status. Yet both therapeutic modalities were able to produce significantly positive structural changes in the CEO. The current study highlights the neurogenic inflammation as the primary pain generator in chronic LE and the advantage of its treatment with PNI therapy in chronic and refractory cases.

The effects of Mulligan's mobilization with movement technique in patients with lateral epicondylitis

BACKGROUND

Lateral epicondylitis (LE) is a common problem of the arm. Mulligan has proposed the use of mobilization with movement for LE.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effects of Mulligan's mobilization with movement (MWM) in LE.

METHODS

Forty patients were included in the study and randomly assigned to group 1 (n= 20), who received MWM, exercise and cold therapy, or group 2 (n= 20), who received exercise and cold therapy. The sessions were conducted five times a week for two weeks. All measures were conducted at baseline, after treatment, at 1st and 3rd months follow-ups. Mann-Whitney U test, a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain intensity, Patient-rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) Questionnaire for pain intensity and functional disability and a dynamometer for hand grip strength were applied.

RESULTS

VAS activity pain significantly decreased in group 1 after treatment (p= 0.001), at the 1st (p< 0.001) and 3rd months (p= 0.040). There was a significant decrease in VAS night pain in group 1 (p= 0.024), and a significant increase in pain-free grip strength (p= 0.002) after treatment. PRTEE-Pain scores decreased in group 1 after treatment (p< 0.001), 1st (p< 0.001) and 3rd months (p= 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

MWM plus exercise and cold therapy is a safe and effective alternative with positive effects on elbow pain, functional capacity, and pain-free, maximum grip strength.

EFFICACY OF ESWT FOR LATERAL EPICONDYLITIS TREATMENT: COMPARISON WITH PHYSICAL THERAPY MODALITIES

Lateral epicondylitis (LE) is a common condition characterized by pain in the lateral side of the elbow with tenderness on lateral epicondyle, caused by repetetive overuse of extensor muscles of the wrist. Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) is used in musculoskeletal problems with the possible mechanism of action including hyperstimulation analgesia, neovascularization and induction of healing process. LE generally responds well to conservative treatment. One of the widely used and accepted terms of treatment for LE is physical therapy (PT). In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of ESWT for LE treatment with conventional therapy modalities. This is a prospective randomized study with 73 patients with elbow pain and otherwise healthy, diagnosed as LE. Patients were randomized to two groups to receive either ESWT weekly for 3 weeks or PT for 10 days. Our analysis revealed similar treatment success rates for both groups in many of the evaluation parameters. As a result of our study we were unable to display a major difference between the short-term outcome for two options. However, ESWT still has the advantage of being less time consuming for both the patient and the doctor, an important parameter we believe.

Management of Chronic Lateral Epicondylitis With Manual Therapy and Local Cryostimulation: A Pilot Study

Objective

The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of adding cryostimulation to manual therapy in patients with chronic lateral epicondylitis.

Methods

The control group (n = 19) was treated with manual therapy consisting of soft-tissue therapy and radial head mobilizations. The experimental group (n = 18) received cryostimulation in addition to manual therapy care similar to that for the control group. Both protocols consisted of 8 treatments over a 4-week period. Outcome measures included pain intensity (visual analog scale), pain-free grip strength (handheld dynamometer), and functional index (Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation questionnaire). Assessments were performed at baseline, postintervention, and 3-month follow-up. Adherence and dropout rates were also considered.

Results

Both groups exhibited significant improvements in pain intensity and functional index at postintervention assessments, which were maintained at follow-up. All participants attended the prescribed number of treatments, but 27% were lost at follow-up. Minor adverse events were reported after cryostimulation in 4 cases.

Conclusions

This study indicated that it is feasible to complete a clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of adding cryostimulation to manual therapy in patients with chronic lateral epicondylitis. On the basis of these preliminary data, the combination of cryostimulation and manual therapy care did not provide any additional benefits in both the short term and the long term. Manual myofascial point treatment and mobilization techniques yielded positive outcomes in chronic lateral epicondylitis. Further studies should focus on the sole therapeutic effect of cryostimulation in both patients with acute and those with chronic conditions.