Effects of a manual therapy technique in experimental lateral epicondylalgia

Adverse Events Reported in Trials Assessing Manual Therapy to the Extremities: A Systematic Review

Objective: This review aimed to describe the quality and comprehensiveness of adverse event (AE) reporting in clinical trials incorporating manual therapy (MT) as an intervention for extremity conditions using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT)-Harms extension as the benchmark. The secondary aim was to determine whether the quality of AE reporting improved after the availability of the CONSORT reporting checklist. Design: Systematic review. Methods: A literature search was conducted using multiple databases to identify trials where MT was used to treat extremity conditions. Studies that reported AEs were identified and evaluated using the CONSORT-Harms extension. The frequency of trials reporting study AEs before and after the publication of the updated 2010 CONSORT statement was calculated, along with the categorization of how study AEs were reported. Results: Of the 55,539 studies initially identified, 220 trials met all inclusion criteria. Eighty trials (36.4%) reported AE occurrence. None of the studies that reported AEs adhered to all 10 criteria proposed by the 2010 CONSORT-Harms extension. The most commonly reported criterion was number four, which clarified how AE-related information was collected (30% of trials). The least reported criterion was number six, which describes the participant withdrawals for each arm due to AEs and the experience with the allocated treatment (1.3% of trials). The nomenclature used to describe AEs varied substantially. Fifty-nine of 76 trials (33.3%) were published after the updated CONSORT Harms-checklist was available, compared to 21 of 44 trials (46.7%) published before it was available. Conclusion: Reporting of AEs in trials investigating MT for extremity conditions is poor. Every included trial lacked adherence to all 10 criteria proposed by the CONSORT-Harms Extension. The quality and comprehensiveness of AE reporting did not improve after the most recent CONSORT update recommending AE reporting. Clinicians must obtain informed consent before performing any intervention, including MT, which requires disclosing potential risks, which could be better known with improved tracking, analyzing, and reporting of AEs. The authors recommend improved adherence to best practices for adequately tracking and reporting AEs in future MT trials.

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.

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.

Detection of blood flow perfusion and post - occlusive reactive hyperemia in the skeletal muscle of rats

AIMS

Post-occlusive reactive hyperemia (PORH) remains poorly understood in the skeletal muscle system. This study was designed to validate an alternative strategy of PORH detection in rodents. Additionally, we explored the hypothesis that PORH is influenced by experimental models associated with impaired function of the skeletal muscle.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Wistar rats were anesthetized, and blood flow was assessed by laser Doppler in the anterior tibialis muscle, before and immediately after 5 s, 30 s, 3 min, or 5 min of flow occlusion, obtained through a cuff inflated to 300 mmHg around the thigh of the animals.

KEY FINDINGS

In healthy animals, deflating the cuff resulted in a fast increment of local blood flow, characterizing the PORH after 5 s to 5 min of cuff occlusion and its dependence on flow occlusion duration. Importantly, we found different profiles of PORH in animals pretreated with reserpine (accelerated peak and reduced half recovery time), streptozotocin (increased peak), or subjected to muscle contraction in stretching (delayed peak), approaches used as experimental models to study fibromyalgia, type II diabetes mellitus, and soreness induced by unaccustomed eccentric exercise, respectively.

SIGNIFICANCE

We demonstrated that the profile of PORH in the anterior tibialis muscle of rats is sensitive to a variety of experimental models often associated with the skeletal muscle functionality, providing a useful strategy to explore how and whether changes in local regulation of blood flow can contribute to the development of skeletal muscle associated symptoms in clinically relevant conditions.

Immediate effects of cervical unilateral anterior-posterior mobilisation on shoulder pain and impairment in post-operative arthroscopy patients

BACKGROUND

Lateral gliding cervical spine mobilisation is shown to improve shoulder pain, disability and function. However, despite common clinical-use, no study reports the effect of unilateral anterior-posterior (A-P) cervical mobilisation on shoulder pain and function, and particularly in patients after arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

OBJECTIVE

Examine the immediate effect of single-level Grade III cervical unilateral A-P mobilisation on shoulder pain, flexion and abduction range of motion (ROM) and external rotator strength compared to placebo cervical unilateral A-P light touch pressure.

METHODS

Single session intervention with a crossover design in 32 (15 women) postoperative arthroscopic shoulder patients.

RESULTS

Immediate and superior treatment effects were shown for A-P cervical mobilisation in improving flexion ROM, isometric strength of external rotation, and pain intensity during flexion (all p< 0.05) when compared to the placebo. However, effects may not be considered clinically meaningful.

CONCLUSION

Unilateral A-P mobilisation applied to the cervical spine shows a tendency toward positively influencing post-arthroscopy shoulder pain and function. Further study examining cervical mobilisations directed in different planes to influence shoulder motion appear warranted.

Multimodal approach to rehabilitation of the patients with lateral epicondylosis: a case series

Purpose

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of mobilization with movement and kinesiotherapy in the treatment of patients with lateral epicondylosis.

Methods

This cases series included eight volunteers who had chronic lateral epicondylosis. The patients were treated with stretching, massage deep transverse at the lateral epicondyle and mobilization with movement associated with eccentric exercise. The mobilization with movement that consisted of a force of lateral glide of the proximal forearm. We performed twelve sessions, twice a week for 45 min/session. All patients underwent an evaluation with a visual analog scale and functional assessment through questionnaires patient-rated tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) and disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH), before and after the treatment. Data were analyzed by student’s t test (p < 0.05).

Results

The results showed statistical differences in pain symptoms before and after treatment, in the analysis and functional assessment through both questionnaires comparing the pre and post treatment.

Conclusion

The data obtained in this study demonstrates improvement of the function and pain status of the sample investigated.

Moving without moving: immediate management following lumbar spine surgery using a graded motor imagery approach: a case report

Representational body maps are dynamically maintained in the brain and negatively influenced by neglect, decreased movement and pain. Graded motor imagery (GMI) utilizing various tactile and cognitive processes has shown efficacy in decreasing pain, disability and movement restrictions in musculoskeletal pain. Limited information is known about the cortical changes patients undergo during lumbar surgery (LS), let alone the therapeutic effect of GMI for LS. A 56-year-old patient underwent LS for low back pain, leg pain and progressive neurological deficit. Twenty-four hours prior to and 48 h after LS various psychometric, physical movement and tactile acuity measurements were recorded. Apart from predictable postoperative increases in pain, fear-avoidance, disability and movement-restrictions, pressure pain thresholds (PPT), two-point discrimination (TPD) and tactile acuity was greatly reduced. The patient underwent six physiotherapy (PT) treatments receiving a GMI program aimed at restoring the PPT, TPD and tactile acuity. The results revealed that GMI techniques applied to a patient immediately after LS caused marked improvements in movement (flexion average improvement/session 3.3 cm; straight leg raise average 8.3°/session) and an immediate hypoalgesic effect. GMI may provide PT with a non-threatening therapeutic treatment for the acute LS patient and establish a new role for PT in acute LS patients.

The effect of spinal manipulation on deep experimental muscle pain in healthy volunteers

Background

High-velocity low-amplitude (HVLA) spinal manipulation is commonly used in the treatment of spinal pain syndromes. The mechanisms by which HVLA-manipulation might reduce spinal pain are not well understood, but often assumed to relate to the reduction of biomechanical dysfunction. It is also possible however, that HVLA-manipulation involves a segmental or generalized inhibitory effect on nociception, irrespective of biomechanical function. In the current study it was investigated whether a local analgesic effect of HVLA-manipulation on deep muscle pain could be detected, in healthy individuals.

Methods and materials

Local, para-spinal muscle pain was induced by injection of 0.5 ml sterile, hyper-tonic saline on two separate occasions 1 week apart. Immediately following the injection, treatment was administered as either a) HVLA-manipulation or b) placebo treatment, in a randomized cross-over design. Both interventions were conducted by an experienced chiropractor with minimum 6 years of clinical experience. Participants and the researcher collecting data were blinded to the treatment allocation. Pain scores following saline injection were measured by computerized visual analogue pain scale (VAS) (0-100 VAS, 1 Hz) and summarized as a) Pain duration, b) Maximum VAS, c) Time to maximum VAS and d) Summarized VAS (area under the curve). Data analysis was performed as two-way analysis of variance with treatment allocation and session number as explanatory variables.

Results

Twenty-nine healthy adults (mean age 24.5 years) participated, 13 women and 16 men. Complete data was available for 28 participants. Analysis of variance revealed no statistically significant difference between active and placebo manipulation on any of the four pain measures.

Conclusion

The current findings do not support the theory that HVLA-manipulation has a non-specific, reflex-mediated local or generalized analgesic effect on experimentally induced deep muscle pain. This in turn suggests, that any clinical analgesic effect of HVLA-manipulation is likely related to the amelioration of a pre-existing painful problem, such as reduction of biomechanical dysfunction.

Astym treatment vs. eccentric exercise for lateral elbow tendinopathy: a randomized controlled clinical trial

Introduction. Patients with chronic lateral elbow (LE) tendinopathy, commonly known as tennis elbow, often experience prolonged symptoms and frequent relapses. Astym treatment, evidenced in animal studies to promote the healing and regeneration of soft tissues, is hypothesized to improve outcomes in LE tendinopathy patients. This study had two objectives: (1) to compare the efficacy of Astym treatment to an evidence-based eccentric exercise program (EE) for patients with chronic LE tendinopathy, and (2) to quantify outcomes of subjects non-responsive to EE who were subsequently treated with Astym treatment.

Study Design. Prospective, two group, parallel, randomized controlled trial completed at a large orthopedic center in Indiana. Inclusion criteria: age range of 18–65 years old, with clinical indications of LE tendinopathy greater than 12 weeks, with no recent corticosteriod injection or disease altering comorbidities.

Methods. Subjects with chronic LE tendinopathy (107 subjects with 113 affected elbows) were randomly assigned using computer-generated random number tables to 4 weeks of Astym treatment (57 elbows) or EE treatment (56 elbows). Data collected at baseline, 4, 8, 12 weeks, 6 and 12 months. Primary outcome measure: DASH; secondary outcome measures: pain with activity, maximum grip strength and function. The treating physicians and the rater were blinded; subjects and treating clinicians could not be blinded due to the nature of the treatments.

Results. Resolution response rates were 78.3% for the Astym group and 40.9% for the EE group. Astym subjects showed greater gains in DASH scores (p = 0.047) and in maximum grip strength (p = 0.008) than EE subjects. Astym therapy also resolved 20/21 (95.7%) of the EE non-responders, who showed improvements in DASH scores (p < 0.005), pain with activity (p = 0.002), and function (p = 0.004) following Astym treatment. Gains continued at 6 and 12 months. No adverse effects were reported.

Conclusion. This study suggests Astym therapy is an effective treatment option for patients with LE tendinopathy, as an initial treatment, and after an eccentric exercise program has failed.

Registration/Funding. Ball Memorial Hospital provided limited funding. Trial registration was not required by FDAAA 801.

Known about the Subject. Under the new paradigm of degenerative tendinopathy, eccentric exercise (EE) is emerging as a first line conservative treatment for LE tendinopathy. EE and Astym treatment are among the few treatment options aiming to improve the degenerative pathophysiology of the tendon. In this trial, Astym therapy, which has shown success in the treatment of tendinopathy, is compared to EE, which has also shown success in the treatment of tendinopathy.

Clinical Relevance. There is a need for more effective, conservative treatment options. Based on the current efficacy study, Astym therapy appears to be a promising, non-invasive treatment option.

Effect of a single session of muscle-biased therapy on pain sensitivity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Muscle-biased therapies (MBT) are commonly used to treat pain, yet several reviews suggest evidence for the clinical effectiveness of these therapies is lacking. Inadequate treatment parameters have been suggested to account for inconsistent effects across studies. Pain sensitivity may serve as an intermediate physiologic endpoint helping to establish optimal MBT treatment parameters. The purpose of this review was to summarize the current literature investigating the short-term effect of a single dose of MBT on pain sensitivity in both healthy and clinical populations, with particular attention to specific MBT parameters of intensity and duration.

METHODS

A systematic search for articles meeting our prespecified criteria was conducted using Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and MEDLINE from the inception of each database until July 2012, in accordance with guidelines from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis. Relevant characteristics from studies included type, intensity, and duration of MBT and whether short-term changes in pain sensitivity and clinical pain were noted with MBT application. Study results were pooled using a random-effects model to estimate the overall effect size of a single dose of MBT on pain sensitivity as well as the effect of MBT, dependent on comparison group and population type.

RESULTS

Reports from 24 randomized controlled trials (23 articles) were included, representing 36 MBT treatment arms and 29 comparative groups, where 10 groups received active agents, 11 received sham/inert treatments, and eight received no treatment. MBT demonstrated a favorable and consistent ability to modulate pain sensitivity. Short-term modulation of pain sensitivity was associated with short-term beneficial effects on clinical pain. Intensity of MBT, but not duration, was linked with change in pain sensitivity. A meta-analysis was conducted on 17 studies that assessed the effect of MBT on pressure pain thresholds. The results suggest that MBT had a favorable effect on pressure pain thresholds when compared with no-treatment and sham/inert groups, and effects comparable with those of other active treatments.

CONCLUSION

The evidence supports the use of pain sensitivity measures by future research to help elucidate optimal therapeutic parameters for MBT as an intermediate physiologic marker.

Basic aspects of musculoskeletal pain: from acute to chronic pain

The transition from acute to chronic musculoskeletal pain is not well understood. To understand this transition, it is important to know how peripheral and central sensitization are manifested and how they can be assessed. A variety of human pain biomarkers have been developed to quantify localized and widespread musculoskeletal pain. In addition, human surrogate models may be used to induce sensitization in otherwise healthy volunteers. Pain can arise from different musculoskeletal structures (e.g. muscles, joints, ligaments, or tendons), and differentiating the origin of pain from those different structures is a challenge. Tissue specific pain biomarkers can be used to tease these different aspects. Chronic musculoskeletal pain patients in general show signs of local/central sensitization and spread of pain to degrees which correlate to pain intensity and duration. From a management perspective, it is therefore highly important to reduce pain intensity and try to minimize the duration of pain.

Joint manipulation in the management of lateral epicondylalgia: a clinical commentary

Lateral epicondylalgia or tennis elbow is a prevalent musculoskeletal disorder that is characterized by lateral elbow pain often associated with gripping tasks. The underlying pathology remains to be fully elucidated; however, evidence indicates that the disorder does not involve an inflammatory process but rather impairments of the pain and motor systems as well as morphological changes in the structure of both the extensor carpi radialis brevis muscle and tendon. Although the most efficient management approach remains controversial, there is a growing body of literature reporting the effects and underlying mechanisms of joint manipulation in the management of lateral epicondylalgia. Evidence exists demonstrating that joint manipulation directed at the elbow and wrist as well as at the cervical and thoracic spinal regions results in clinical alterations in pain and the motor system. In addition to presenting this evidence, this paper describes proposed underlying physiological mechanisms of joint manipulation associated with the observed clinical effects. We propose that this information will be useful for the physical therapist in making clinical decisions regarding the selection of treatment technique for the management of patients with lateral epicondylalgia.

A systematic review of the effectiveness of manipulative therapy in treating lateral epicondylalgia

Lateral epicondylalgia is a commonly encountered musculoskeletal complaint. Currently, there is no agreement regarding the exact underlying pathoanatomical cause or the most effective management strategy. Various forms of joint manipulation have been recommended as treatment. The purpose of this study was to systematically review available literature regarding the effectiveness of manipulation in treating lateral epicondylalgia. A comprehensive search of Medline, CINAHL, Health Source, SPORTDiscus, and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database ending in November 2007 was conducted. Thirteen studies, both randomized and non-randomized clinical trials, met inclusion criteria. Articles were assessed for quality by one reviewer using the 10-point PEDro scale. Quality scores ranged from 1-8 with a mean score of 5.15 +/- 1.85. This score represented fair quality overall; however, trends indicated the presence of consistent methodological flaws. Specifically, no study achieved successful blinding of the patient or treating therapist, and less than 50% used a blinded outcome assessor. Additionally, studies varied significantly in terms of outcome measures, follow-up, and comparison treatments, thus making comparing results across studies difficult. Results of this review support the use of Mulligan's mobilization with movement in providing immediate, short-, and long-term benefits. In addition, positive results were demonstrated with manipulative therapy directed at the cervical spine, although data regarding long-term effects were limited. Currently, limited evidence exists to support a synthesis of any particular technique whether directed at the elbow or cervical spine. Overall, this review identified the need for further high-quality studies using larger sample sizes, valid functional outcome measures, and longer follow-up periods.