Lateral epicondylitis treatment: international survey of surgeons' preferences and literature review

Added value of ultrasound-guided percutaneous needle tenotomy over hydrodissection and physiotherapy in chronic lateral elbow tendinopathy: a pilot randomized controlled trial

Aim of the study

There is no consensus on the most suitable non-surgical treatment of chronic lateral elbow tendinopathy. The aim of this pilot randomized controlled trial was to evaluate the size of effect of ultrasound-guided percutaneous needle tenotomy.

Material and methods

Three intervention arms were formed: 1) percutaneous needle tenotomy, hydrodissection, and physiotherapy; 2) hydrodissection and physiotherapy; and 3) physiotherapy alone. Patients with chronic lateral elbow tendinopathy were randomized. Clinical endpoints included multiple questionnaires after three months: Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain at rest and during activity, and EuroQol 5D-5L (EQ-5D-5L).

Results

Thirty patients were included of 128 screened. The QuickDASH score improved in the percutaneous needle tenotomy and physiotherapy group, but not in the hydrodissection group. The NRS pain at rest and during activity improved more in the percutaneous needle tenotomy (resp. -2 and -2) and hydrodissection (resp. -3 and -3) groups than in the physiotherapy (resp. +1 and -1) group. The EQ-5D-5L improved similarly in all groups.

Conclusions

Patients receiving percutaneous needle tenotomy and/or hydrodissection may show better results in terms of pain but not in their functional outcomes compared to those who received physiotherapy alone. The size of effect, however, is small, so a large sample size is needed for a future randomized controlled trial to further investigate these results.

The impact of a hand therapy workplace-based educational approach on the management of lateral elbow tendinopathy: A randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) is one of the most prevalent work-related musculoskeletal conditions. Management strategies for LET rarely consider patients' work environments and have limited focus on education regarding occupational risk factors. Workplace-based rehabilitation has shown benefits in the return to work processes for injured workers with other health conditions, but no studies have investigated the impact of a workplace-based educational approach in the management of LET.

PURPOSES

First, to identify the impact of an additional workplace-based educational intervention to standard hand therapy care on the outcomes of pain, grip strength, and function. Second, to identify the effectiveness of standard hand therapy on the same clinical outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

A randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Forty-nine participants were randomized to the control group (n = 25) or intervention group (n == 24). The control group received standard hand therapy for 12 weeks. The intervention group received standard hand therapy for the first 12 weeks plus an additional workplace-based educational intervention, "Working Hands-ED," delivered by a hand therapist. Pain levels for provocative tests, grip strength, and function were measured using a Numeric Rating Scale, Jamar Dynamometer, and the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation questionnaire at baseline, weeks 6 and 12. The Patient-Specific Functional Scale was also used for the intervention group.

RESULTS

There were no statistical differences between both groups for all clinical outcomes by 12 weeks (P> .05). Pain levels for all provocative tests and Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation scores statistically improved within both groups (P < .05), however with small effect sizes observed. The Patient-Specific Functional Scale scores statistically improved for the intervention group by 12 weeks (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

The addition of a hand therapy workplace-based intervention did not result in superior clinical outcomes for pain, grip strength, and function. The study identified that a multimodal self-management approach used by hand therapists improved their patients' pain and function regardless of whether the education was given in the clinic or the workplace.

Trends in Corticosteroid Injections for Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis: An Analysis of 80,169 Patients

Corticosteroid (CS) injections are a frequently used treatment modality for lateral epicondylitis (LE) despite an increasing number of studies suggesting their lack of efficacy. The objective of this study was to review the annual utilization of CS injections for treatment of LE, as well as that of other nonsurgical treatments and surgical treatments, to understand how recent publications have affected the practice of physicians in treating LE.

How one treats lateral epicondylitis - a survey among Brazilian orthopedists

BACKGROUND

Lateral epicondylitis (LE), also known as tennis elbow, is the most common painful elbow condition. It affects approximately 1-3% of adults. There are various possible treatments described in the literature, but evidence to support a gold standard management protocol is lacking. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate how Brazilian orthopaedists diagnose and treat lateral epicondylitis and compare these results with the available evidence.

METHODS

This is an observational, analytical, cross-sectional study. A questionnaire was prepared to obtain information from the participants with eight specific questions (2 on diagnosis and 6 on treatment). These questions were answered voluntarily by participants at 3 major congresses of orthopaedists in Brazil in 2018. The results were analysed in accordance with the overall number of responses and were evaluated among groups according to subspecialty.

RESULTS

We obtained a total of 501 questionnaires. Of these, 33 were excluded. The mean age was 38.67 years. The majority of respondents (91%) were male. We obtained 26.7% from specialists in hand surgery (Hand group), 36.5% from subspecialists in shoulder and elbow (Shoulder and Elbow group), and 36.8% from generalists in orthopaedics or from other subspecialties (General Orthopaedists group). For diagnosis, 24.4% did not initially request any imaging method. The most requested exam was ultrasonography (54.9%). The most prominent indication for initial treatment was physical therapy. For refractory cases, 78.3% of the respondents preferred doing a local infiltration. The most commonly used substance for local infiltrations was corticosteroids (89.6%). With respect to the surgical treatment option, 75.8% of those who recommend it prefer open techniques, and 24.2% prefer arthroscopic treatment. Of the total respondents, 12.8% did not recommend surgical treatment for LE.

CONCLUSION

Among Brazilian orthopaedists, the Cozen test is most frequently chosen, and ultrasound is the most commonly used imaging tool. Nonsurgically, oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) plus physiotherapy is the most popular initial therapy, and corticosteroids are the most popular type of infiltration agent. Most surgeons recommended surgery after 6 months of nonsurgical treatment, and 75.8% preferred the open technique.

Do hand therapists have a role in workplace-based education to manage tennis elbow? Beliefs about effective treatments among Australian hand therapists and medical practitioners

BACKGROUND

Lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET), commonly known as tennis elbow, is a prevalent work-related upper extremity musculoskeletal disorder. Medical practitioners and hand therapists manage LET with commonly available clinic-based treatments, despite no sound evidence to suggest long-term relief and functional restoration for workers with LET. Workplace-based rehabilitation is effective for injured workers with other health conditions, but no studies have investigated this rehabilitation approach in the management of LET.

OBJECTIVES

(i) Identify, compare, and contrast Australian hand therapists' and medical practitioners' perceptions about the effectiveness of common treatments for LET, and (ii) obtain their views towards a hand therapist delivered workplace-based education approach.

METHODS

In this cross-sectional study, 38 medical practitioners from Western Australia and 104 hand therapists around Australia completed online surveys. Independent t-tests were used to identify between-group differences in responses.

RESULTS

Despite some between-group differences regarding the perceived effectiveness of common LET treatments, both groups believed education about LET pathology, activity modification, postures, and workplace recommendations were most effective. Most medical practitioners (81%) and hand therapists (71%) believed workplace-based education delivered by a hand therapist would be beneficial for patients with acute and chronic LET.

CONCLUSION

Australian hand therapists and medical practitioners believed educational approaches were the most important component in the management of LET, and supported workplace-based educational interventions provided by hand therapists in the management of LET.

Minimally invasive treatment of lateral epicondylitis

Lateral epicondylitis (LE), also known as tennis elbow, is the most common cause of elbow pain in adults, with approximately 1-3% of the general population being afflicted. Although the condition is usually self-limiting, pain can be a major hindrance, limiting daily activity and the work capacity of patients. As a result, many treatment options have become available with the aim to shorten the duration of the disease and increase the quality of life. Steroid injections, NSAIDs, topical creams, platelet-rich plasma, physical therapy, and kinesiotaping are considered conservative treatments, while surgical options are last-resort treatments reserved for refractory LE. In this review, we will provide a brief summary of LE and focus on addressing conservative and minimally invasive interventional options for the treatment of LE.

The Effect of Impactful Articles on Clinical Practice in the United States: Corticosteroid Injection for Patients with Lateral Epicondylitis

BACKGROUND

Following publication of high-level evidence demonstrating that it is not an effective treatment for lateral epicondylitis, a reduction in the corticosteroid injection rate would be expected. The authors aimed to clarify current clinical practice pattern for lateral epicondylitis and identify factors that influence the introduction of evidence into clinical practice.

METHODS

In this administrative claims analysis, the authors used 2009 to 2015 Truven MarketScan data to extract claims for corticosteroid injection, physical therapy, platelet-rich plasma injection, and surgery for lateral epicondylitis. The authors performed multivariable analysis using a generalized estimating equation model to identify the variables that potentially affect the odds of receiving a given treatment.

RESULTS

Among 711,726 claims, the authors found that the odds of receiving a corticosteroid injection increased slightly after publication of contradictory evidence (OR, 1.7; 95 percent CI, 1.04 to 1.11 in 2015). Being male (OR, 1.21; 95 percent CI, 1.19 to 1.23), older (OR, 1.16; 95 percent CI, 1.13 to 1.19), and having managed care insurance (OR, 1.15; 95 percent CI, 1.13 to 1.18) significantly contributed to increased odds of receiving corticosteroid injections. Patients seen at facilities in the South (OR, 1.33; 95 percent CI, 1.30 to 1.36 compared with the Northeast) and by plastic/orthopedic surgeons (OR, 2.48; 95 percent CI, 2.43 to 2.52) also had increased odds of receiving corticosteroid injection.

CONCLUSIONS

Corticosteroid injection use did not decrease after publication of impactful articles, regardless of provider specialty or other patient-related factors. This finding emphasizes that there are various barriers for even high-level evidence to overcome the inertia of current practice.

Arthroscopic Treatment of Lateral Epicondylitis: Tenotomy Versus Debridement

PURPOSE

To compare the outcome of 2 arthroscopic techniques for treating recalcitrant lateral epicondylitis.

METHODS

The study included patients undergoing arthroscopic treatment of lateral epicondylitis during 2 different time periods: April 2005 to October 2007 (tenotomy) and May 2009 to June 2010 (debridement). By using a patient-administered form, baseline information including QuickDASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) score (primary outcome), visual analog scale (VAS) of pain, and VAS of function was recorded prospectively. To have the same follow-up period of minimum 4 years in the 2 groups, the follow-up was conducted at 2 different points of time.

RESULTS

Of a total of 326 patients fulfilling the requirements for inclusion in the study, 283 patients (87%) were followed up (144 male and 139 female, median age 46 [21 to 65] years), 204 (87%) in the tenotomy group and 79 (88%) in the debridement group. In both groups, a significant improvement in the QuickDASH was found at the follow-up compared with baseline: from 60 to 12 in the debridement group (P < .001) and from 59 to 13 in the tenotomy group (P < .001). No statistically significant difference was found in baseline or follow-up QuickDASH, VAS of pain, VAS of function, or failure (reoperation) rate between the 2 groups. The mean length of sick leave was 2 weeks shorter in the debridement only group (P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

Both arthroscopic methods lead to a significant improvement of pain and function, and no statistically significant difference was found in any outcome parameters between the 2 techniques at this minimum 4-year evaluation. The results indicate that tenotomy of the extensor carpi radialis brevis may be an unnecessary step in the arthroscopic treatment of lateral epicondylitis Debridement only is a potentially less costly procedure, and the current finding of a mean 2 weeks shorter sick leave in the debridement only group proposes a substantial cost saving in a societal perspective.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic case series.