Skip to main content
main-content

01.12.2015 | Research article | Ausgabe 1/2015 Open Access

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2015

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

Zeitschrift:
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders > Ausgabe 1/2015
Autoren:
Christoph Weber, Veronika Thai, Katrin Neuheuser, Katharina Groover, Oliver Christ
Wichtige Hinweise

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.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

CW and VL designed the study; CW, KN, KG and VL analyzed the data; VL, KN, KG and OC collected data; CW and VL wrote the first draft of the paper; KN, KG, OC contributed to the writing of the paper; CW contributed to analysis and interpretation of the data; CW and KN contributed to the discussions on the design and interpretation of the study. CW and OC conducted final revisions. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Abstract

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.
Zusatzmaterial
Additional file 1: Overall pain reduction for physical therapy groups. (PDF 332 kb)
12891_2015_665_MOESM1_ESM.pdf
Additional file 2: Overall pain reduction in ECSWT groups. (PDF 267 kb)
12891_2015_665_MOESM2_ESM.pdf
Additional file 3: Pain reduction in Non-ECSWT groups. (PDF 274 kb)
12891_2015_665_MOESM3_ESM.pdf
Additional file 4: Pain during grip strength test relief in LLLT groups. (PDF 240 kb)
12891_2015_665_MOESM4_ESM.pdf
Additional file 5: Pain during maximum grip strength test relief in LLLT-sham groups. (PDF 243 kb)
12891_2015_665_MOESM5_ESM.pdf
Additional file 6: Pain during maximum handgrip strength test reduction in LLLT groups. (PDF 245 kb)
12891_2015_665_MOESM6_ESM.pdf
Additional file 7: Maximum grip strength gain in treatment groups (LLLT and ECSWT). (PDF 233 kb)
12891_2015_665_MOESM7_ESM.pdf
Additional file 8: Maximum grip strength gain in sham-groups (associated with LLLT and ECSWT). (PDF 231 kb)
12891_2015_665_MOESM8_ESM.pdf
Additional file 9: Differences between treatment and sham-groups in maximum handgrip strength at the end of treatment (LLLT and ECSWT). (PDF 235 kb)
12891_2015_665_MOESM9_ESM.pdf
Literatur
Über diesen Artikel

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2015

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2015 Zur Ausgabe

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

21.11.2019 | ACR 2019 | Kongressbericht | Onlineartikel

Anifrolumab bei SLE nun doch mit signifikanten Ergebnissen

21.11.2019 | ACR 2019 | Kongressbericht | Onlineartikel

Handarthrose: Tops und Flops vom ACR-Kongress

21.11.2019 | ACR 2019 | Kongressbericht | Onlineartikel

JAK - selektive Inhibitoren bei RA mit Vorteilen?

21.11.2019 | ACR 2019 | Kongressbericht | Onlineartikel

Erste Daten zur Differentialtherapie der PsA

Mail Icon II Newsletter

Bestellen Sie unseren kostenlosen Newsletter Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Bildnachweise