Search

Background and Purpose: Understanding physiotherapy practices is important to identify variations from empirical evidence and highlight requirements for training. This survey explored international physiotherapy practices for assessment of lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET)., Methods: Two hundred ninety-nine surveyed physiotherapists from eight member countries of the International Federation of Manual and Orthopaedic Physical Therapists completed the survey. Respondents rated their frequency of use (never, rarely, sometimes, often, and always) for items related to: patient history; diagnostic tests; grip and upper limb strength; cervical and neurological assessment; and medical imaging. To establish practices, the five response categories were dichotomised into routine practice (often, always) and not-routine practice (sometimes, rarely, never). A response rate of ≥70% for each dichotomy was used to determine whether an assessment item was deemed routine practice or not, with items not meeting either criterion considered neither routine nor not-routine practice., Results: Most respondents were from United States (63%). The 'chair pick up test', 'cervical special tests', and 'plain radiograph' met our criteria for not routine practice (i.e., 70%, 72%, and 71%, respectively). All other assessment items did not meet the criteria to be considered routine or not-routine practice., Conclusion: The chair pick-up test, cervical spine special tests (e.g., Spurling's test), and plain radiography appear to not be routinely used in the assessment of LET. The finding that no assessment technique met the criteria for routine use may imply that physiotherapists adopt a nuanced approach to selecting clinical assessment items as opposed to routinely applying tests., (© 2024 The Author(s). Physiotherapy Research International published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Question: In people with carpal tunnel syndrome who are waitlisted for surgical consultation, does a therapist-led care pathway involving education, splinting and exercises reduce the need for surgery and improve patient outcomes?, Design: A multicentre, randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation, blinded assessment and intention-to-treat analysis., Participants: One hundred and five people with electrodiagnostically confirmed carpal tunnel syndrome on a waitlist for surgical consultation and recruited from four public hospitals in Australia., Interventions: The experimental group (n = 52) received a one-off group session of education, splinting, and nerve and tendon gliding exercises. The control group (n = 53) continued on the waitlist without additional care., Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measures were conversion to surgery by 24 weeks, the global rating of change (GROC) scale and patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included symptom severity and functional limitation., Results: At 24 weeks, conversion to surgery was 59% in the experimental group and 80% in the control group (risk difference -0.21, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.03). More participants in the experimental group identified as improved at 6 weeks (20% vs 4%; risk difference 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.28) but not at 24 weeks (24% vs 10%; risk difference 0.14, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.29). The intervention was also estimated to be beneficial on some measures of satisfaction, symptom severity and functional limitation. The study's estimates of the benefits came with some uncertainty, which makes it unclear whether the wider population of people awaiting carpal tunnel surgery would consider that the benefits make the intervention worthwhile. No serious adverse effects were reported., Conclusions: A therapist-led pathway reduced conversion to carpal tunnel surgery and increased perceived improvement and satisfaction in people who were already on a waitlist for surgical consultation., Registration: ACTRN12613001095752., (Copyright © 2020 Australian Physiotherapy Association. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Question: Does adding mobilisation with movement (MWM) to usual care (ie, exercises plus advice) improve outcomes after immobilisation for a distal radius fracture?, Design: A prospective, multicentre, randomised, clinical trial with concealed allocation, blinding and intention-to-treat analysis., Participants: Sixty-seven adults (76% female, mean age 60 years) treated with casting after distal radius fracture., Intervention: The control group received exercises and advice. The experimental group received the same exercises and advice, plus supination and wrist extension MWM., Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was forearm supination at 4 weeks (immediately post-intervention). Secondary outcomes included wrist extension, flexion, pronation, grip strength, QuickDASH (Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand), Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) and global rating of change. Follow-up time points were 4 and 12 weeks, with patient-rated measures at 26 and 52 weeks., Results: Compared with the control group, supination was greater in the experimental group by 12 deg (95% CI 5 to 20) at 4 weeks and 8 deg (95% CI 1 to 15) at 12 weeks. Various secondary outcomes were better in the experimental group at 4 weeks: extension (14 deg, 95% CI 7 to 20), flexion (9 deg, 95% CI 4 to 15), QuickDASH (-11, 95% CI -18 to -3) and PRWE (-13, 95% CI -23 to -4). Benefits were still evident at 12 weeks for supination, extension, flexion and QuickDASH. The experimental group were more likely to rate their global change as 'improved' (risk difference 22%, 95% CI 5 to 39). There were no clear benefits in any of the participant-rated measures at 26 and 52 weeks, and no adverse effects., Conclusion: Adding MWM to exercise and advice gives a faster and greater improvement in motion impairments for non-operative management of distal radius fracture., Registration: ACTRN12615001330538., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Introduction: Patellofemoral pain (PFP) affects 1 in every 14 adults. Many treatments for PFP have been evaluated, but the comparative effectiveness of all available treatments has never been examined. Network meta-analysis is the only design to study the comparative effectiveness of all available treatments in one synthesis. This protocol describes the methods for a systematic review including network meta-analysis to assess which treatment is most likely to be effective for patients with PFP., Methods and Analysis: The primary outcome measures of this network meta-analysis are the global rating of change scale at 6-12 weeks, 13-52 weeks and >52 weeks. The secondary outcome measures are patient-rated pain scales at 6-12 weeks, 13-52 weeks and >52 weeks. Completed published and unpublished randomised controlled trials with full-text reports are eligible for inclusion. We will search Embase, PubMed (including MEDLINE), CENTRAL, Scopus, Web of Science, and CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, OpenGrey, WorldCat, conference Proceedings and multiple trial registers for relevant reports. Two researchers will appraise the study eligibility and perform data extraction. Risk of bias will be assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool V.2.0.Bayesian network meta-analyses will be constructed for global rating of change scale and patient-rated pain. Consistency between direct and indirect comparisons will be assessed. Between study variability will be explored, and a threshold analysis for the credibility of the network meta-analyses' conclusions will be performed., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical approval is not required, as this study will be based on published data. The study commenced at 1 February 2018, and its expected completion date is 15 January 2019. Full publication of the work will be sought in an international peer-reviewed journal, as well as translational articles to disseminate the work to clinical practitioners., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42018079502., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MW receives funding outside this project from Trygfonden, a non-profit organisation in Denmark., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objectives: To determine the feasibility of a clinical trial that compares a 6-week, physiotherapist-guided gait retraining program with a foot orthoses intervention in runners with patellofemoral pain., Design: Pilot randomised controlled trial., Methods: Runners aged 18-40 years with clinically diagnosed patellofemoral pain were randomly allocated to either a 6-week gait retraining intervention of increasing cadence and use of a minimalist shoe or prefabricated foot orthoses. Outcomes at baseline and 12-weeks included recruitment, retention, adherence, adverse events, global improvement, anterior knee pain scale, worst and average pain on a 100mm visual analogue scale., Results: Of the 16 randomised participants, two withdrew prior to commencing treatment due to non-trial related matters (n=1 from each group) and 14 completed the pilot trial. Minor calf muscle soreness was reported by 3 participants in the gait retraining group while no adverse events were reported in the foot orthoses group. There were no deviations from the treatment protocols. There was a large between-group difference favouring gait retraining at 12-weeks in the anterior knee pain scale and the worst pain in the past week, which was reflected in the number needed-to-treat of 2., Conclusions: This study supports the feasibility of a trial comparing gait retraining with foot orthoses and provides point estimates of effect that informs the design and planning of a larger clinical trial. It appears that a 6-week gait retraining program has a clinically meaningful effect on runners with patellofemoral pain when compared to an evidence-based treatment of foot orthoses., (Copyright © 2017 Sports Medicine Australia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Clinical reasoning can be difficult to teach to pre-professional physiotherapy students due to their lack of clinical experience. It may be that tools such as clinical prediction rules (CPRs) could aid the process, but there has been little investigation into their use in physiotherapy clinical education. This study aimed to determine the perceptions and experiences of physiotherapy students regarding CPRs, and whether they are learning about CPRs on clinical placement., Design: Cross-sectional survey using a paper-based questionnaire., Participants: Final year pre-professional physiotherapy students (n=371, response rate 77%) from five universities across five states of Australia., Results: Sixty percent of respondents had not heard of CPRs, and a further 19% had not clinically used CPRs. Only 21% reported using CPRs, and of these nearly three-quarters were rarely, if ever, learning about CPRs in the clinical setting. However most of those who used CPRs (78%) believed CPRs assisted in the development of clinical reasoning skills and none (0%) was opposed to the teaching of CPRs to students. The CPRs most commonly recognised and used by students were those for determining the need for an X-ray following injuries to the ankle and foot (67%), and for identifying deep venous thrombosis (63%)., Conclusions: The large majority of students in this sample knew little, if anything, about CPRs and few had learned about, experienced or practiced them on clinical placement. However, students who were aware of CPRs found them helpful for their clinical reasoning and were in favour of learning more about them., (Copyright © 2016 Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To determine the cost-effectiveness of corticosteroid injection, physiotherapy and a combination of these interventions, compared to a reference group receiving a blinded placebo injection., Methods: 165 adults with unilateral lateral epicondylalgia of longer than 6 weeks duration from Brisbane, Australia, were randomised for concealed allocation to saline injection (placebo), corticosteroid injection, saline injection plus physiotherapy (eight sessions of elbow manipulation and exercise) or corticosteroid injection plus physiotherapy. Costs to society and health-related quality of life (estimated by EuroQol-5D) over the 1 year follow-up were used to generate incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) ratios for each intervention relative to placebo., Results: Intention-to-treat analysis was possible for 154 (93%) of trial participants. Physiotherapy was more costly, but was the only intervention that produced a statistically significant improvement in quality of life relative to placebo (MD, 95% CI 0.035, 0.003 to 0.068). Similar cost/QALY ratios were found for physiotherapy ($A29 343; GBP18 962) and corticosteroid injection ($A31 750; GBP20 518); however, the probability of being more cost-effective than placebo at values above $A50 000 per quality-adjusted life year was 81% for physiotherapy and 53% for corticosteroid injection. Cost/QALY was far greater for a combination of corticosteroid injection and physiotherapy ($A228 000; GBP147 340)., Summary: Physiotherapy was a cost-effective treatment for lateral epicondylalgia. Corticosteroid injection was associated with greater variability, and a lower probability of being cost-effective if a willingness to pay threshold of $A50 000 is assumed. A combination of corticosteroid injection and physiotherapy was ineffective and cost-ineffective. Physiotherapy, not corticosteroid injection, should be considered as a first-line intervention for lateral epicondylalgia., Trial Registration Number: anzctr.org Trial identifier: ACTRN12609000051246., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.)

Synopsis Clear guidelines for the clinical management of individuals with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) are hampered by many proposed interventions and the condition's prognosis, ranging from immediate resolution of symptoms following simple advice in some patients to long-lasting problems, regardless of treatment, in others. This is compounded by our lack of understanding of the complexity of the underlying pathophysiology of LET. In this article, we collate evidence and expert opinion on the pathophysiology, clinical presentation, and differential diagnosis of LET. Factors that might provide prognostic value or direction for physical rehabilitation, such as the presence of neck pain, tendon tears, or central sensitization, are canvassed. Clinical recommendations for physical rehabilitation are provided, including the prescription of exercise and adjunctive physical therapy and pharmacotherapy. A preliminary algorithm, including targeted interventions, for the management of subgroups of patients with LET based on identified prognostic factors is proposed. Further research is needed to evaluate whether such an approach may lead to improved outcomes and more efficient resource allocation. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2015;45(11):938-949. Epub 17 Sep 2015. doi:10.2519/jospt.2015.5841.

Patients presenting with pain at the tendon, which is associated with physical tasks and activities that specifically load that tendon, are at the center of this special issue. The current terminology for a symptomatic tendon presentation is tendinopathy, as this does not denote an underlying pathology, but rather signals that all is not well in the tendon. Tendinopathy is a prevalent and substantial problem, as it interferes with a person's capacity to lead a physically active and healthy life, which has a considerable flow-on effect on society in general. This issue deals with the contemporary physical therapy management of tendinopathy by providing a mix of evidence review and clinical expert opinion on commonly presenting tendinopathies of the lower and upper limbs. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2015;45(11):816-818. doi:10.2519/jospt.2015.0110.

Importance: Corticosteroid injection and physiotherapy, common treatments for lateral epicondylalgia, are frequently combined in clinical practice. However, evidence on their combined efficacy is lacking., Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of corticosteroid injection, multimodal physiotherapy, or both in patients with unilateral lateral epicondylalgia., Design, Setting, and Patients: A 2 × 2 factorial, randomized, injection-blinded, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at a single university research center and 16 primary care settings in Brisbane, Australia. A total of 165 patients aged 18 years or older with unilateral lateral epicondylalgia of longer than 6 weeks' duration were enrolled between July 2008 and May 2010; 1-year follow-up was completed in May 2011., Interventions: Corticosteroid injection (n = 43), placebo injection (n = 41), corticosteroid injection plus physiotherapy (n = 40), or placebo injection plus physiotherapy (n = 41)., Main Outcome Measures: The 2 primary outcomes were 1-year global rating of change scores for complete recovery or much improvement and 1-year recurrence (defined as complete recovery or much improvement at 4 or 8 weeks, but not later) analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis (P < .01). Secondary outcomes included complete recovery or much improvement at 4 and 26 weeks., Results: Corticosteroid injection resulted in lower complete recovery or much improvement at 1 year vs placebo injection (83% vs 96%, respectively; relative risk [RR], 0.86 [99% CI, 0.75-0.99]; P = .01) and greater 1-year recurrence (54% vs 12%; RR, 0.23 [99% CI, 0.10-0.51]; P < .001). The physiotherapy and no physiotherapy groups did not differ on 1-year ratings of complete recovery or much improvement (91% vs 88%, respectively; RR, 1.04 [99% CI, 0.90-1.19]; P = .56) or recurrence (29% vs 38%; RR, 1.31 [99% CI, 0.73-2.35]; P = .25). Similar patterns were found at 26 weeks, with lower complete recovery or much improvement after corticosteroid injection vs placebo injection (55% vs 85%, respectively; RR, 0.79 [99% CI, 0.62-0.99]; P < .001) and no difference between the physiotherapy and no physiotherapy groups (71% vs 69%, respectively; RR, 1.22 [99% CI, 0.97-1.53]; P = .84). At 4 weeks, there was a significant interaction between corticosteroid injection and physiotherapy (P = .01), whereby patients receiving the placebo injection plus physiotherapy had greater complete recovery or much improvement vs no physiotherapy (39% vs 10%, respectively; RR, 4.00 [99% CI, 1.07-15.00]; P = .004). However, there was no difference between patients receiving the corticosteroid injection plus physiotherapy vs corticosteroid alone (68% vs 71%, respectively; RR, 0.95 [99% CI, 0.65-1.38]; P = .57)., Conclusion and Relevance: Among patients with chronic unilateral lateral epicondylalgia, the use of corticosteroid injection vs placebo injection resulted in worse clinical outcomes after 1 year, and physiotherapy did not result in any significant differences., Trial Registration: anzctr.org Identifier: ACTRN12609000051246.

Question: What are the benefits and harms of neural tissue management in the short term for treating nerve-related neck and arm pain?, Design: Randomised controlled trial., Participants: Sixty participants with non-traumatic nerve-related neck and unilateral arm pain were randomised to experimental (n=40) or control (n=20) groups., Intervention: Both groups were advised to continue usual activities. The experimental group also received education, manual therapy, and nerve gliding exercises in 4 treatments over 2 weeks., Outcome Measures: Primary outcomes were participant-reported improvement and worsening on a Global Rating of Change scale. Secondary outcomes were neck pain, arm pain, the Neck Disability Index, the Patient-Specific Functional Scale, and adverse events related to treatment. Follow-up occurred 3-4 weeks after baseline., Results: Numbers needed to treat favoured the experimental intervention for participant-reported improvement (2.7, 95% CI 1.7 to 6.5), neck pain (3.6, 95% CI 2.1 to 10), arm pain (3.6, 95% CI 2.1 to 10), Neck Disability Index (4.3, 95% CI 2.4 to 18.2), and Patient-Specific Functional Scale (3.0, 95% CI 1.9 to 6.7). The prevalence of worsening in the experimental (13%) and control (20%) groups were not different (RD -7%, 95% CI -28 to 13). Adverse events had minimal impact on daily activities and did not reduce the chance of improving with the experimental intervention (RR = 1.03, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.84)., Conclusion: These results enable physiotherapists to inform patients that neural tissue management provides immediate clinically relevant benefits beyond advice to remain active with no evidence of harmful effects., Trial Registration: ACTRN 12610000446066., (Copyright © 2012 Australian Physiotherapy Association. Published by .. All rights reserved.)

Researchers have been encouraged to identify characteristics that predict patients' responses to different musculoskeletal interventions. We describe a novel protocol to develop a prediction model that identifies patients with nerve-related neck and arm pain who are likely to benefit from the early introduction of neural tissue management (NTM). Prediction models for musculoskeletal treatments have usually been developed by analyzing single group study data with standard logistic regression. However, this approach has important limitations and our two step process for model development will address these limitations. Eligible patients will be aged 18 to 60 years with a minimum four week episode of non-traumatic neck and unilateral arm pain that is reproduced by a mechanical provocation test for the cervical nerve roots and median nerve. The outcome being predicted by the model is patient-reported improvement four weeks after baseline. Patients rating themselves at least 'moderately better' on a Global Rating of Change scale will be considered 'improved'. First, a randomized control trial (RCT) comparing standardized NTM to advice to remain active will determine whether this outcome represents a NTM treatment effect. The RCT has 80% power to detect a number needed to treat ≤ 3 favoring NTM (p ≤ 0.05). Second, a comprehensive set of examination items will be analyzed with penalized logistic regression to select the best items for the prediction model., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Lateral pain in the elbow affects up to 3% of the population, and is considered an overload injury of the extensor tendons of the forearm where they attach at the lateral epicondyle. Although usually self-limiting, symptoms may persist for over 1 year in up to 20% of people., Methods and Outcomes: We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of treatments for tennis elbow? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to November 2009 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA)., Results: We found 80 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions., Conclusions: In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: acupuncture, autologous whole blood injections, corticosteroid injections, combination physical therapies, exercise, extracorporeal shock wave therapy, iontophoresis, low-level laser therapy, manipulation, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (oral and topical), orthoses (bracing), platelet-rich plasma injections, pulsed electromagnetic field treatment, surgery, and ultrasound.

Background: Altered neuromotor control during running after cycling has been associated with exercise-related leg pain and may have performance implications for triathletes., Objective: To investigate the effectiveness of adding plyometric training to regular endurance training on triathletes' neuromotor control and running economy in those in which it is aberrant., Design: Randomised controlled trial., Setting: Institutional., Participants: 15 moderately-trained triathletes., Interventions: Eight-week endurance only (control group) or endurance plus plyometric (plyometric group) training program., Main Outcome Measures: Neuromotor control and running economy during running after cycling., Results: Eight of the fifteen triathletes exhibited aberrant neuromotor control and were randomised to control or plyometric groups. Combined plyometric and endurance training produced favourable neuromotor adaptations during running after cycling beyond that of endurance training at 8 weeks (numbers needed to treat 2). There were significant differences between control and plyometric groups at eight weeks for the coefficient of multiple correlation (p=0.03) and root mean square error (p = 0.01) between control and transition runs. Running economy was not different between groups at follow-up., Conclusion: Our results provide some support for the utility of plyometrics as an intervention to correct altered neuromotor control in those triathletes in which it is aberrant., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Chronic whiplash is a common and costly problem. Sensory hypersensitivity is a feature of chronic whiplash that is associated with poor responsiveness to physical treatments such as exercise. Modalities such as dry-needling have shown some capacity to modulate sensory hypersensitivity, suggesting that when combined with advice and exercise, such an approach may be more effective in the management of chronic whiplash. The primary aim of this project is to investigate the effectiveness of dry-needling, advice and exercise for chronic whiplash., Method/design: A double-blind randomised controlled trial will be conducted. 120 participants with chronic whiplash, grade II will be randomised to receive either 1) dry-needling, advice and exercise or 2) sham dry-needling, advice and exercise. All participants will receive an educational booklet on whiplash. Participants who are randomised to Group 1 will receive 6 treatments of combined dry-needling and exercise delivered in the first 3 weeks of the 6 week program, and 4 treatments of exercise only in the last 3 weeks of the program. Participants randomised to Group 2 will receive an identical protocol, except that a sham dry-needling technique will be used instead of dry-needling. The primary outcome measures are the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and participants' perceived recovery. Outcomes will be measured at 6, 12, 24 and 52 weeks after randomization by an assessor who is blind to the group allocation of the participants. In parallel, an economic analysis will be conducted., Discussion: This trial will utilise high quality trial methodologies in accordance with CONSORT guidelines. The successful completion of this trial will provide evidence of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a combined treatment approach for the management of chronic whiplash., Trial Registration: ACTRN12609000470291.

Background: Corticosteroid injection and physiotherapy are two commonly prescribed interventions for management of lateral epicondylalgia. Corticosteroid injections are the most clinically efficacious in the short term but are associated with high recurrence rates and delayed recovery, while physiotherapy is similar to injections at 6 weeks but with significantly lower recurrence rates. Whilst practitioners frequently recommend combining physiotherapy and injection to overcome harmful effects and improve outcomes, study of the benefits of this combination of treatments is lacking. Clinicians are also faced with the paradox that the powerful anti-inflammatory corticosteroid injections work well, albeit in the short term, for a non-inflammatory condition like lateral epicondylalgia. Surprisingly, these injections have not been rigorously tested against placebo injections. This study primarily addresses both of these issues., Methods: A randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial with a 2 x 2 factorial design will evaluate the clinical efficacy, cost-effectiveness and recurrence rates of adding physiotherapy to an injection. In addition, the clinical efficacy and adverse effects of corticosteroid injection beyond that of a placebo saline injection will be studied. 132 participants with a diagnosis of lateral epicondylalgia will be randomly assigned by concealed allocation to one of four treatment groups - corticosteroid injection, saline injection, corticosteroid injection with physiotherapy or saline injection with physiotherapy. Physiotherapy will comprise 8 sessions of elbow manipulation and exercise over an 8 week period. Blinded follow-up assessments will be conducted at baseline, 4, 8, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation. The primary outcome will be a participant rating of global improvement, from which measures of success and recurrence will be derived. Analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis using linear mixed and logistic regression models. Healthcare costs will be collected from a societal perspective, and along with willingness-to-pay and quality of life data will facilitate cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses., Conclusion: This trial will utilise high quality trial methodologies in accordance with CONSORT guidelines. Findings from this study will assist in the development of evidence based practice recommendations and potentially the optimisation of resource allocation for rehabilitating lateral epicondylalgia., Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Register ACTRN12609000051246.

Tennis elbow or lateral epicondylalgia is a diagnosis familiar to many within the general community and presents with an uncomplicated clinical picture in most cases. However, the underlying pathophysiology presents a more complex state and its management has not been conclusively determined. Research on this topic extends across anatomical, biomechanical and clinical literature; however, integration of findings is lacking. We propose that the current understanding of the underlying pathophysiology of lateral epicondylalgia can be conceptualised as encompassing three interrelated components: (i) the local tendon pathology, (ii) changes in the pain system, and (iii) motor system impairments. This paper presents a model that integrates these components on the basis of a literature review with the express aim of assisting in the targeting of specific treatments or combinations thereof to individual patients.

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of foot orthoses in the management of patellofemoral pain syndrome with flat inserts or physiotherapy, and to investigate the effectiveness of foot orthoses plus physiotherapy., Design: Prospective, single blind, randomised clinical trial., Setting: Single centre trial within a community setting in Brisbane, Australia., Participants: 179 participants (100 women) aged 18 to 40 years, with a clinical diagnosis of patellofemoral pain syndrome of greater than six weeks' duration, who had no previous treatment with foot orthoses or physiotherapy in the preceding 12 months., Interventions: Six weeks of physiotherapist intervention with off the shelf foot orthoses, flat inserts, multimodal physiotherapy (patellofemoral joint mobilisation, patellar taping, quadriceps muscle retraining, and education), or foot orthoses plus physiotherapy., Main Outcome Measures: Global improvement, severity of usual and worst pain over the preceding week, anterior knee pain scale, and functional index questionnaire measured at 6, 12, and 52 weeks., Results: Foot orthoses produced improvement beyond that of flat inserts in the short term, notably at six weeks(relative risk reduction 0.66,99%confidence interval 0.05 to 1.17; NNT 4 (99% confidence interval 2 to 51). No significant differences were found between foot orthoses and physiotherapy, or between physiotherapy and physiotherapy plus orthoses. All groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in primary outcomes over 52 weeks., Conclusion: While foot orthoses are superior to flat inserts according to participants' overall perception, they are similar to physiotherapy and do not improve outcomes when added to physiotherapy in the short term management of patellofemoral pain. Given the long term improvement observed in all treatment groups, general practitioners may seek to hasten recovery by prescribing prefabricated orthoses.

Objectives: To evaluate the time course of sensorimotor deficits in lateral epicondylalgia (LE; tennis elbow) and how these deficits may be influenced by common conservative treatments., Design: Single-blind randomized controlled trial., Setting: University laboratory, Australia., Participants: A total of 198 participants with unilateral LE of a minimum 6 weeks duration and normative data from a group of 40 healthy participants., Interventions: Participants with LE were randomly assigned to physical therapy, corticosteroid injection, or a wait-and-see approach with ergonomic advice., Main Outcome Measures: Upper-limb reaction time (simple, 1-choice and 2-choice reaction time) and speed of movement were assessed at baseline and 6 and 52 weeks of follow-up., Results: Patients with LE exhibited delayed reaction times (P<.001) and slower movement speeds (P<.001) for both the affected and unaffected arm at baseline, compared with normative data. Despite some improvement over time, significant bilateral deficits remained compared with healthy participants, with no significant differences between the affected and unaffected arm. Overall, there was no significant difference between the 3 treatment groups over time., Conclusions: Sensorimotor deficits remain relatively unchanged over time and are present bilaterally in patients with unilateral LE. Treatment did not influence the time course of the sensorimotor deficits. This prompts conjecture as to the relationship and clinical relevance of sensorimotor deficits in LE. It should be noted that treatment evaluated in this study did not specifically target sensorimotor function, and further investigation into the significance of sensorimotor deficits in patients with LE is required.

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of foot orthoses in the management of patellofemoral pain syndrome with flat inserts or physiotherapy, and to investigate the effectiveness of foot orthoses plus physiotherapy., Design: Prospective, single blind, randomised clinical trial., Setting: Single centre trial within a community setting in Brisbane, Australia., Participants: 179 participants (100 women) aged 18 to 40 years, with a clinical diagnosis of patellofemoral pain syndrome of greater than six weeks' duration, who had no previous treatment with foot orthoses or physiotherapy in the preceding 12 months., Interventions: Six weeks of physiotherapist intervention with off the shelf foot orthoses, flat inserts, multimodal physiotherapy (patellofemoral joint mobilisation, patellar taping, quadriceps muscle retraining, and education), or foot orthoses plus physiotherapy., Main Outcome Measures: Global improvement, severity of usual and worst pain over the preceding week, anterior knee pain scale, and functional index questionnaire measured at 6, 12, and 52 weeks., Results: Foot orthoses produced improvement beyond that of flat inserts in the short term, notably at six weeks (relative risk reduction 0.66, 99% confidence interval 0.05 to 1.17; NNT 4 (99% confidence interval 2 to 51). No significant differences were found between foot orthoses and physiotherapy, or between physiotherapy and physiotherapy plus orthoses. All groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in primary outcomes over 52 weeks., Conclusion: While foot orthoses are superior to flat inserts according to participants' overall perception, they are similar to physiotherapy and do not improve outcomes when added to physiotherapy in the short term management of patellofemoral pain. Given the long term improvement observed in all treatment groups, general practitioners may seek to hasten recovery by prescribing prefabricated orthoses., Trial Registration: Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012605000463673 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00118521.

Background: The patellofemoral joint (PFJ) is one compartment of the knee that is frequently affected by osteoarthritis (OA) and is a potent source of OA symptoms. However, there is a dearth of evidence for compartment-specific treatments for PFJ OA. Therefore, this project aims to evaluate whether a physiotherapy treatment, targeted to the PFJ, results in greater improvements in pain and physical function than a physiotherapy education intervention in people with symptomatic and radiographic PFJ OA., Methods: 90 people with PFJ OA (PFJ-specific history, signs and symptoms and radiographic evidence of PFJ OA) will be recruited from the community and randomly allocated into one of two treatments. A randomised controlled trial adhering to CONSORT guidelines will evaluate the efficacy of physiotherapy (8 individual sessions over 12 weeks, as well as a home exercise program 4 times/week) compared to a physiotherapist-delivered OA education control treatment (8 individual sessions over 12 weeks). Physiotherapy treatment will consist of (i) quadriceps muscle retraining; (ii) quadriceps and hip muscle strengthening; (iii) patellar taping; (iv) manual PFJ and soft tissue mobilisation; and (v) OA education. Resistance and dosage of exercises will be tailored to the participant's functional level and clinical state. Primary outcomes will be evaluated by a blinded examiner at baseline, 12 weeks and 9 months using validated and reliable pain, physical function and perceived global effect scales. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis using linear mixed regression models, including respective baseline scores as a covariate, subjects as a random effect, treatment condition as a fixed factor and the covariate by treatment interaction., Conclusion: This RCT is targeting PFJ OA, an important sub-group of knee OA patients, with a specifically designed conservative intervention. The project's outcome will influence PFJ OA rehabilitation, with the potential to reduce the personal and societal burden of this increasing public health problem., Trial Registration: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12608000288325.

Background: Patellofemoral pain syndrome is a highly prevalent musculoskeletal overuse condition that has a significant impact on participation in daily and physical activities. A recent systematic review highlighted the lack of high quality evidence from randomised controlled trials for the conservative management of patellofemoral pain syndrome. Although foot orthoses are a commonly used intervention for patellofemoral pain syndrome, only two pilot studies with short term follow up have been conducted into their clinical efficacy., Methods/design: A randomised single-blinded clinical trial will be conducted to investigate the clinical efficacy and cost effectiveness of foot orthoses in the management of patellofemoral pain syndrome. One hundred and seventy-six participants aged 18-40 with anterior or retropatellar knee pain of non-traumatic origin and at least six weeks duration will be recruited from the greater Brisbane area in Queensland, Australia through print, radio and television advertising. Suitable participants will be randomly allocated to receive either foot orthoses, flat insoles, physiotherapy or a combined intervention of foot orthoses and physiotherapy, and will attend six visits with a physiotherapist over a 6 week period. Outcome will be measured at 6, 12 and 52 weeks using primary outcome measures of usual and worst pain visual analogue scale, patient perceived treatment effect, perceived global effect, the Functional Index Questionnaire, and the Anterior Knee Pain Scale. Secondary outcome measures will include the Lower Extremity Functional Scale, McGill Pain Questionnaire, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Patient-Specific Functional Scale, Physical Activity Level in the Previous Week, pressure pain threshold and physical measures of step and squat tests. Cost-effectiveness analysis will be based on treatment effectiveness against resource usage recorded in treatment logs and self-reported diaries., Discussion: The randomised clinical trial will utilise high-quality methodologies in accordance with CONSORT guidelines, in order to contribute to the limited knowledge base regarding the clinical efficacy of foot orthoses in the management of patellofemoral pain syndrome, and provide practitioners with high-quality evidence upon which to base clinical decisions., Trial Registration: Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012605000463673ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00118521.

Objectives: To determine if subgroups of patients with tennis elbow respond differently in treatment., Methods: This study used individual patient data (n = 383) from two randomized controlled trials that investigated a wait-and-see policy, corticosteroid injections and physiotherapy. Common outcome measures were: pain severity, global improvement, severity assessed by a blinded assessor, elbow disability and pain free grip strength. Subgroup analyses for previous history of elbow pain, baseline pain severity, duration of the current episode and employment status were performed at 6 and 52 weeks., Results: Patients' age, previous elbow symptoms and baseline pain severity were similar between trials, but other characteristics differed between trial populations. Based on individual patient data from both trials, we found that corticosteroid injections were statistically and clinically superior at 6 weeks, but significantly worse at 52 weeks compared with both wait-and-see and physiotherapy. Subgroup effects were scarce and small. Patients with higher baseline pain score showed less benefit on pain outcomes between physiotherapy and a wait-and-see policy at 6 weeks. It also appeared that non-manual workers who had an injection were the only work subgroup to follow the general trend that injections were significantly worse than a wait-and-see policy on global improvement at 52 weeks., Conclusion: The treatment outcomes were largely similar between trials and not different between most subgroups studied. In tennis elbow, it would appear that patient characteristics play only a small role in predicting treatment outcomes, which supports the generalizability of individual trial results.

Objective: To determine if the force exerted onto the supporting surface by the dorsal head during graded contractions of isometric craniocervical flexion (ICCF) in the supine position has the potential to measure aberrant muscle performance between participant groups with and without painful neck disorders., Design: Cross-sectional, between-participant study of the force exerted by the head on the supporting surface during ICCF muscle contractions., Setting: Research laboratory., Participants: Thirty-two participants with a history of neck pain and 32 asymptomatic control participants., Interventions: Not applicable., Main Outcome Measure: Dorsal head force (DHF), which is the force (in newtons) exerted by the head on the supporting surface during ICCF muscle contractions in the supine position. ICCF muscle contractions were performed at maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), and sustained at contractions of 50% of MVC and 20% of MVC., Results: Both neck pain and control participants significantly increased their DHF on the supporting surface from resting values during all ICCF muscle contractions (P<.001). No differences in DHF were found between symptomatic and control participants during any of the ICCF efforts., Conclusions: It would appear that DHF exerted on the supporting surface during graded ICCF muscle contractions is similar between neck pain sufferers and control participants, and is therefore limited in its usefulness as a measurement of abnormal performance.

A systematic review of the literature on the effectiveness of physical interventions for lateral epicondylalgia (tennis elbow) was carried out. Seventy six randomised controlled trials were identified, 28 of which satisfied the minimum criteria for meta-analysis. The evidence suggests that extracorporeal shock wave therapy is not beneficial in the treatment of tennis elbow. There is a lack of evidence for the long term benefit of physical interventions in general. However, further research with long term follow up into manipulation and exercise as treatments is indicated.

This case report describes a strategy for assessing the suitability of orthotic prescription for individual patients with lower limb overuse injuries. The case concerns a 32 year old male soccer player with a two-year history of Achilles tendinopathy. A functional assessment performed before, during, and after a trial period of anti-pronation taping showed that taping reduced symptoms markedly and resulted in a 10-fold increase in pain-free jogging distance. This was interpreted as an indication for favourable orthotic intervention. Subsequently, orthotic intervention was associated with a similar reduction in symptoms and improvement in function. This case study illustrates how a trial period of anti-pronation taping could assist therapists to make decisions about prescription of orthoses for lower limb overuse injuries.

Manipulative therapy is frequently used in the management of musculoskeletal pain. A frequently reported clinical feature of this treatment is the immediacy with which it appears to initiate improvement in pain and function. A randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, repeated measures design was employed to study the initial effects of a cervical spine treatment technique in a group of 15 patients with lateral epicondylalgia. Pressure pain threshold, pain-free grip strength, upper limb neurodynamics, pain and function were assessed prior to and following application of either a treatment, placebo or control condition. All subjects received all three conditions. Differences between the pre-post measures were used as indicators of change in subject's symptom profiles. The treatment condition produced significant improvement in pressure pain threshold, pain-free grip strength, neurodynamics and pain scores relative to placebo and control conditions (P < 0.05). In summary, this study demonstrates that manipulative therapy is capable of eliciting a rapid hypoalgesic effect.