Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23999980›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2013

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation as adjunct to primary care management for tennis elbow: pragmatic randomised controlled trial (TATE trial).

Linda S Chesterton, A Martyn Lewis, Julius Sim, Christian D Mallen, Elizabeth E Mason, Elaine M Hay, Daniëlle A van der Windt

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Does Kinesiotaping improve pain and functionality in patients with newly diagnosed lateral epicondylitis?Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2018
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Narrative review of current neuromodulation modalities for spinal cord injury.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Linda S ChestertonArthritis Research UK Primary Care Centre, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5BG, UK. l.s.chesterton@keele.ac.uk
A Martyn Lewis
Julius Sim
Christian D Mallen
Elizabeth E Mason
Elaine M Hay
Daniëlle A van der Windt
Keele University · GB

Funding

Department of Health PB-PG-0407-13189Versus Arthritis 19634
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo investigate the effectiveness of supplementing information and advice on analgesia and exercise from a general practitioner with transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) as a non-drug form of analgesia to reduce pain intensity in patients with tennis elbow.

designPragmatic randomised controlled trial in primary care. SETTING AND: 38 general practices in the West Midlands, UK.

participants241 adults consulting with a first or new (no consultation in previous six months) clinical diagnosis of tennis elbow.

interventionsParticipants were randomly allocated to either primary care management alone, consisting of a consultation with a general practitioner followed by information and advice on exercises, or primary care management plus TENS to be used once a day for 45 minutes over six weeks (or until symptom resolution) for pain relief. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was self reported intensity of elbow pain (0-10 rating scale) at six weeks. Primary and secondary outcomes were measured at baseline and at six weeks, six months, and 12 months by postal questionnaire. Analysis was by intention to treat.

results121 participants were randomised to primary care management plus TENS and 120 to primary care management only (first episode, n=197 (82%); duration <1-3 months, n=138 (57%)). Adherence to exercise and TENS recommendations reported at six weeks was low; only 42 participants in the primary care management plus TENS group met a priori defined adherence criteria. Both intervention groups showed large improvements in pain and secondary outcomes, especially during the first six weeks of follow-up. However, no clinically or statistically significant differences were seen between groups at any follow-up timepoint. At the primary endpoint (six weeks), the between group difference in improvement of pain was -0.33 (95% confidence interval -0.96 to 0.31; P=0.31) in favour of the primary care management only group, with adjustment for age, sex, and baseline pain score.

conclusionsThis trial does not provide evidence for additional benefit of TENS as an adjunct to primary care management of tennis elbow. Poor adherence to interventions is evidence of the challenges of implementing self management treatment strategies in primary care.

trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN87141084.

Indexed as

ArthralgiaPatient ComplianceTennis ElbowAdultExercise TherapyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain ManagementPain MeasurementPrimary Health CareSelf CareTranscutaneous Electric Nerve StimulationTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID23999980
PMCPMC3759476
OpenAlexW2014280729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.