Cargando…

Efficacy of physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis (LE) often comprises movement therapies, extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ECSWT), low level laser therapy (LLLT), low frequency electrical stimulation or pulsed electromagnetic fields. Still, only ECSWT and LLLT have been meta-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Weber, Christoph, Thai, Veronika, Neuheuser, Katrin, Groover, Katharina, Christ, Oliver
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4549077/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26303397
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0665-4
_version_ 1782387264477724672
author Weber, Christoph
Thai, Veronika
Neuheuser, Katrin
Groover, Katharina
Christ, Oliver
author_facet Weber, Christoph
Thai, Veronika
Neuheuser, Katrin
Groover, Katharina
Christ, Oliver
author_sort Weber, Christoph
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis (LE) often comprises movement therapies, extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ECSWT), low level laser therapy (LLLT), low frequency electrical stimulation or pulsed electromagnetic fields. Still, only ECSWT and LLLT have been meta-analytically researched. METHODS: PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane database were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methodological quality of each study was rated with an adapted version of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklist. Pain reduction (the difference between treatment and control groups at the end of trials) and pain relief (the change in pain from baseline to the end of trials) were calculated with mean differences (MD) and 95 %-Confidence intervals (95 % CI). RESULTS: One thousand one hundred thirty eight studies were identified. One thousand seventy of those did not meet inclusion criteria. After full articles were retrieved 16 studies met inclusion criteria and 12 studies reported comparable outcome variables. Analyses were conducted for overall pain relief, pain relief during maximum handgrip strength tests, and maximum handgrip strength. There were not enough studies to conduct an analysis of physical function or other outcome variables. CONCLUSIONS: Differences between treatment and control groups were larger than differences between treatments. Control group gains were 50 to 66 % as high as treatment group gains. Still, only treatment groups with their combination of therapy specific and non-therapy specific factors reliably met criteria for clinical relevance. Results are discussed with respect to stability and their potential meaning for the use of non-therapy specific agents to optimize patients’ gain. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0665-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4549077
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45490772015-08-26 Efficacy of physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis Weber, Christoph Thai, Veronika Neuheuser, Katrin Groover, Katharina Christ, Oliver BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis (LE) often comprises movement therapies, extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ECSWT), low level laser therapy (LLLT), low frequency electrical stimulation or pulsed electromagnetic fields. Still, only ECSWT and LLLT have been meta-analytically researched. METHODS: PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane database were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methodological quality of each study was rated with an adapted version of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklist. Pain reduction (the difference between treatment and control groups at the end of trials) and pain relief (the change in pain from baseline to the end of trials) were calculated with mean differences (MD) and 95 %-Confidence intervals (95 % CI). RESULTS: One thousand one hundred thirty eight studies were identified. One thousand seventy of those did not meet inclusion criteria. After full articles were retrieved 16 studies met inclusion criteria and 12 studies reported comparable outcome variables. Analyses were conducted for overall pain relief, pain relief during maximum handgrip strength tests, and maximum handgrip strength. There were not enough studies to conduct an analysis of physical function or other outcome variables. CONCLUSIONS: Differences between treatment and control groups were larger than differences between treatments. Control group gains were 50 to 66 % as high as treatment group gains. Still, only treatment groups with their combination of therapy specific and non-therapy specific factors reliably met criteria for clinical relevance. Results are discussed with respect to stability and their potential meaning for the use of non-therapy specific agents to optimize patients’ gain. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0665-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2015-08-25 /pmc/articles/PMC4549077/ /pubmed/26303397 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0665-4 Text en © Weber et al. 2015 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Weber, Christoph
Thai, Veronika
Neuheuser, Katrin
Groover, Katharina
Christ, Oliver
Efficacy of physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis
title Efficacy of physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis
title_full Efficacy of physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis
title_fullStr Efficacy of physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy of physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis
title_short Efficacy of physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis
title_sort efficacy of physical therapy for the treatment of lateral epicondylitis: a meta-analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4549077/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26303397
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-015-0665-4
work_keys_str_mv AT weberchristoph efficacyofphysicaltherapyforthetreatmentoflateralepicondylitisametaanalysis
AT thaiveronika efficacyofphysicaltherapyforthetreatmentoflateralepicondylitisametaanalysis
AT neuheuserkatrin efficacyofphysicaltherapyforthetreatmentoflateralepicondylitisametaanalysis
AT grooverkatharina efficacyofphysicaltherapyforthetreatmentoflateralepicondylitisametaanalysis
AT christoliver efficacyofphysicaltherapyforthetreatmentoflateralepicondylitisametaanalysis