Development of a core outcome set for lateral elbow tendinopathy (COS-LET) using best available evidence and an international consensus process

Comparison of Interventions for Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis for Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation Pain Outcome

PURPOSE

There is controversy regarding the optimal treatment for lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET), and not all available treatment options have been compared directly with placebo/control. A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the effectiveness of different LET treatments directly and indirectly against control/placebo based on a validated outcome, the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) pain score.

METHODS

Randomized, controlled trials comparing different treatment methods for LET were included, provided they reported outcome data using the PRTEE pain score. A network meta-analysis with random effect was used to combine direct and indirect evidence between treatments compared with placebo in the short term (up to six weeks) and midterm (more than six weeks and up to six months) after intervention.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 12 comparators including control/placebo were eligible. The results indicated no significant improvement in PRTEE pain score in the short term across all treatments compared with control/placebo. In the midterm, physiotherapy/exercise showed benefit against placebo (mean difference: -4.32, 95% confidence interval: -7.58 and -1.07). Although steroid injections, dry needling, and autologous blood also exhibited potential treatment effects, it is crucial for the clinician to consider certain pitfalls when considering these treatments. The limited number of small studies and paucity of data call for caution in interpreting the results and need for further evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients should be informed that there is currently no strong evidence that any treatment produces more rapid improvement in pain symptoms when compared with control/placebo in the short and medium terms.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic I.

Exploring the feasibility and acceptance of an optimised physiotherapy approach for lateral elbow tendinopathy: a qualitative investigation within the OPTimisE trial

OBJECTIVES

To explore the acceptability of an optimised physiotherapy (OPTimisE) intervention for people with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) and feasibility of comparing it to usual care in a randomised controlled trial.

DESIGN

Semistructured interviews, analysed using thematic analysis and mapped onto the COM-B model of behaviour change.

SETTING

Conducted as part of the OPTimisE Pilot & Feasibility randomised controlled trial within physiotherapy departments in the United Kingdom National Health Service.

PARTICIPANTS

17 patients with LET (purposively sampled to provide representativeness based on age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation index and treatment allocation) and all 8 physiotherapists involved as treating clinicians or site principal investigators.

RESULTS

Four themes were identified. First, participants reported the OPTimisE intervention as acceptable. Second, differences between the OPTimisE intervention and usual care were identified, including the use of an orthosis, holistic advice/education including modifiable risk factors, forearm stretches, general upper body strengthening and a more prescriptive exercise-dosing regimen. Third, participants provided feedback related to the trial resources, which were viewed positively, but identified language translation as a need. Fourth, feedback related to trial processes identified the need for changes to outcome collection and reduction of administrative burden. From the perspective of adopting the OPTimisE intervention, we found evidence that participants were able to change their behaviour. Considering the findings through the lens of the COM-B model, the intervention is likely to be deliverable in practice and the trial can be delivered at scale with some additional support for physiotherapists.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the OPTimisE intervention was found to be different to usual care and acceptable to patients and physiotherapists. The study highlighted the need to refine trial processes and resources prior to a full-scale trial, to reduce administrative burden, increase support for physiotherapists, improve return rate of outcome questionnaires and provide language translation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN database 19 July 2021. https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN64444585.

Physical therapy intervention versus corticosteroid injection for lateral elbow tendinopathy. Does slow and steady win the race? - A systematic review

Background

Lateral elbow tendinopathy is one of the most common chronic and degenerative diseases which significantly affects quality of life and the activities of daily living of a person. The following is a systematic review reporting a comparison between physical therapy intervention and corticosteroid injection for the treatment of lateral elbow tendinopathy.

Method

PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase were searched using headings related to treatment options for Lateral elbow tendinopathy. The following keywords were used: lateral epicondylitis, physical therapy, and corticosteroid injection.

Result

We descriptively analyzed and reviewed a total of 12 studies including a total of 1253 patients for lateral elbow tendinopathy. The physical therapy intervention included interventions like electrotherapy, manual therapy, and exercise. The studies included had an overall low to unknown risk of bias.

Conclusion

Our review suggests corticosteroid injection provides beneficial short-term effects and physical therapy interventions provide intermediate to long-term effects, less additional treatment and low recurrence rate in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy. Although high-quality randomized control trials are required in order to have a better understanding of both intervention types.

Optimising physiotherapy for people with lateral elbow tendinopathy - Results of a mixed-methods pilot and feasibility randomised controlled trial (OPTimisE)

BACKGROUND

The OPTimisE intervention was developed to address uncertainty regarding the most effective physiotherapy treatment strategy for people with Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy (LET).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the feasibility of conducting a fully-powered randomised controlled trial (RCT) evaluating whether the OPTimisE intervention is superior to usual physiotherapy treatment for adults with LET.

DESIGN

A mixed-methods multi-centred, parallel pilot and feasibility RCT, conducted in three outpatient physiotherapy departments in the UK.

METHOD

Patients were independently randomised 1:1 in mixed blocks, stratified by site, to the OPTimisE intervention or usual care. Outcomes were assessed using pre-defined feasibility progression criteria.

RESULTS

50 patients were randomised (22 Female, 28 Male), mean age 48 years (range 27-75). Consent rate was 71% (50/70), fidelity to intervention 89% (16/18), attendance rate in the OPTimisE group 82% (55/67) vs 85% (56/66) in usual care, outcome measure completion 81% (39/48) at six-month follow-up. There were no related adverse events. Patients and physiotherapists reported that the OPTimisE intervention was acceptable but suggested improvements to the trial design. 49 patients were recruited from physiotherapy referrals vs one from primary care records. Outcome measure return rates were higher when completed online (74%) compared to postal questionnaire (50%). Exploratory analysis showed improvements in both groups over time.

CONCLUSIONS

It is methodologically feasible to conduct a fully powered RCT comparing the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the OPTimisE intervention versus usual physiotherapy treatment. Considering the similar improvements observed in both groups, careful consideration is needed regarding the priority research question to be addressed in future research.

Effects of a Conventional Treatment Plus Scapular Exercises Program in Patients With Chronic Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: A Pre-Post Single-Group Study

BACKGROUND

Weakness of the shoulder girdle muscles has been reported in patients with chronic lateral elbow tendinopathy. The aim of this study was to assess the short- and long-term effects of a conventional treatment plus scapular exercises program in patients with chronic lateral elbow tendinopathy.

METHODS

A single-group prestudy and poststudy were conducted. The primary outcome was the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation questionnaire score. Secondary outcomes were grip strength; Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire score; Visual Analogue Scale score at rest and at grip, and presence of scapular dyskinesis.

RESULTS

A total of 65 patients (72.3% females), with a mean age of 41.8 years, were analyzed. At the end of 6 weeks, the results showed clinically and statistically significant differences (P < .05). At 1-year follow-up, the differences were: Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation -31 points (P < .001); grip strength +33.6% (P < .001); Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand -34.2 points (P < .001); Visual Analogue Scale at rest -2.5 cm (P < .001); and Visual Analogue Scale at grip -2.3 cm (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

At the end of 6 weeks and at 1-year follow-up, conventional treatment plus scapular exercises program showed statistically and clinically significant differences in all functional outcomes assessed in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy.

BESS patient care pathway: Tennis elbow

This article provides a guidance summary for the management of lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system of the rating quality of the literature and grading the strength of available evidence. The process began by assembling a guideline development group of volunteers including orthopaedic surgeons, trainees, physiotherapists, rheumatologists, radiologists and patients. Virtual meetings were organised to set out explicit PICO questions, including specification of all important outcomes (including patient reported tennis elbow evaluation (PRTEE) as an important primary outcome) to determine the clinical effectiveness of common treatment options for LET compared with no treatment or placebo. Clinical librarian searched (date 31 April 2022) for available systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials reviewing the management of the LET January 2011 onwards and evidence was collected and summarized using explicit GRADE criteria for rating the quality of evidence that include study design, risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency, indirectness, and magnitude of effect. Recommendations were characterized as strong or weak (alternative terms conditional or discretionary) according to the quality of the supporting evidence and the balance between desirable and undesirable consequences of alternative management options. This informative summary provides the quality of available evidence for the management of LET.

Minimal important difference, patient acceptable symptom state and longitudinal validity of oxford elbow score and the quickDASH in patients with tennis elbow

BACKGROUND

The Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and the short version of Disabilities of Arms, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) are common patient-reported outcomes for people with elbow problems. Our primary objective was to define thresholds for the Minimal Important Difference (MID) and Patient-Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the OES and QuickDASH. The secondary aim was to compare the longitudinal validity of these outcome measures.

METHODS

We recruited 97 patients with clinically-diagnosed tennis elbow for a prospective observational cohort study in a pragmatic clinical setting. Fifty-five participants received no specific intervention, 14 underwent surgery (11 as primary treatment and 4 during follow-up), and 28 received either botulinum toxin injection or platelet rich plasma injection. We collected OES (0 to 100, higher is better) and QuickDASH (0 to 100, higher is worse), and global rating of change (as an external transition anchor question) at six weeks, three months, six months and 12 months. We defined MID and PASS values using three approaches. To assess the longitudinal validity of the measures, we calculated the Spearman's correlation coefficient between the change in the outcome scores and external transition anchor question, and the Area Under the Curve (AUC) from a receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis. To assess signal-to-noise ratio, we calculated standardized response means.

RESULTS

Depending on the method, MID values ranged from 16 to 21 for OES Pain; 10 to 17 for OES Function; 14 to 28 for OES Social-psychological; 14 to 20 for OES Total score, and - 7 to -9 for QuickDASH. Patient-Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) cut offs were 74 to 84 for OES Pain; 88 to 91 for OES Function; 75 to 78 with OES Social-psychological; 80 to 81 with OES Total score and 19 to 23 with Quick-DASH. OES had stronger correlations with the anchor items, and AUC values suggested superior discrimination (between improved and not improved) compared with QuickDASH. OES also had superior signal-to-noise ratio compared with QuickDASH.

CONCLUSION

The study provides MID and PASS values for OES and QuickDASH. Due to better longitudinal validity, OES may be a better choice for clinical trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02425982 (first registered April 24, 2015).

Do intra-articular temporomandibular disorders show an association between physical bite function, self-perceived bite limitation and kinesiophobia? A case-control study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the impact of intra-articular temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) on bite function, or how bite impairments in this subgroup relate to self-perceived bite limitation or kinesiophobia. This presents a challenge to practitioners involved in delivering care.

OBJECTIVES

To determine what bite impairments are associated with intra-articular TMDs, and explore how these impairments relate to self-perceived bite limitations and kinesiophobia.

DESIGN

Observational, case-control study.

METHOD

Sixty participants (n = 30 intra-articular TMDs, n = 30 healthy controls) were recruited via convenience sampling. Bite function was explored using pain-free bite force and bite endurance/steadiness (submaximal bite hold) measures. Self-perceived bite function and kinesiophobia were evaluated via the Patient specific functional scale (PSFS) and the Tampa Scale for kinesiophobia of Temporomandibular disorders (TSK-TMD) respectively. Between-group data were compared and associations between physical bite impairments, self-perceived bite limitation and kinesiophobia were explored in the intra-articular TMD group.

RESULTS

Pain-free bite force was significantly impaired in the intra-articular TMD group (-108N, p < 0.01, d = 0.9), and this impairment demonstrated moderate association with degree of kinesiophobia (p < 0.01, r = -0.4). No significant between-group difference was observed for bite endurance or force steadiness (p > 0.05). No association was observed between pain-free bite force and self-perceived bite limitation, or self-perceived bite limitation and kinesiophobia (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Impaired pain-free bite force appears to be an important feature of intra-articular TMDs which should be considered within management. Kinesiophobia may be important to consider when assessing bite function in this subgroup. Future research is needed to guide optimal interventions and inform subsequent management guidelines.

Lateral Elbow Pain and Muscle Function Impairments

Although often described as a self-limiting condition and likely to resolve on its own, high recurrence rates and extended sick leave frame a need for effective non-surgical treatment for people with lateral elbow tendinopathy. The interrelationship of histological and structural changes to the tendon, the associated impairments in motor control, and potential changes in pain processing may all drive symptoms. This clinical practice guideline covers the epidemiology, functional anatomy and pathophysiology, risk factors, clinical course, prognosis, differential diagnosis, tests and measures, and interventions for managing lateral elbow tendinopathy in the physical therapy clinic. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(12):CPG1-CPG111. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.0302.