Date of Graduation

2008

Document Type

Thesis

Degree Type

MS

Committee Chair

Michelle A. Sandrey

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the methodological quality of epicondylitis rehabilitation studies found in the current literature. Data Sources: PubMed (1951 - 2008), MDConsult (1980 - 2008), Medline, Web of Science (1985 - 2008), CINAHL (1987- 2008), SPORTDiscus (1976 - 2007), Google Scholar (1928 - 2008), Cochrane Library (1952 - 2007), Science Direct (1940 - 2008) and ERIC (1950 - 2008), from July 2007 to January 2008 were searched using the terms epicondylitis, epicondylalgia, golfer’s elbow, and tennis elbow individually. Second, the term epicondylitis was combined with each of the following words: rehabilitation, anatomy, epidemiology, etiology, strengthening, injections, exercise, therapy, and shockwave. Third, citations were cross-referenced from studies to include literature not found in the original search. Study Selection: Studies were selected based on the following inclusion criteria: 1) written in the English language or English translation, 2) the term epicondylitis must be included in the title, 3) the abstract must include the terms epicondylitis and rehabilitation, non-operative, conservative, or treatment, 4) epicondylitis must be the chief complaint in the study, and 5) study must be a randomized controlled trial. The exclusion criteria included 1) the study may not include treatment for pathological symptoms of the ulnar collateral ligament (UCL); 2) are not associated with treatment of pathology to the spine; and 3) UCL and extensor carpi radialis brevis reconstructive surgery studies. Data Extraction: All the studies that meet the inclusion criteria were then be collected and evaluated using the PEDro Scale. First, each was read completely without the use of the PEDro scale. Next, each article was read a second time using the PEDro scale checklist by both evaluators. Based on the checklist the studies were then awarded points ranging from 0 to 10. Finally, once all the studies are evaluated the primary and secondary investigators compared final scores. No discrepancies arose between the investigators regarding the grading of the studies. Data Synthesis: The 26 studies that were retrieved varied in population of subjects, location of the study, type of rehabilitation program, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and methodological quality. Patient population ranged from 16 to 272 in various studies. The methodological quality of the studies ranged from 4 to10 with the mean average score being 7.4. All of the studies meet the eligibility criteria. Conclusions: The lack of standardization among non-surgical epicondylitis rehabilitation protocols has a wide range of treatments, but as hypothesized there is no standardization in them. The current studies show success in their treatments but many of the results are based on self-reported data only.

Download

Share

COinS