ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2013
Quality measures for the care of patients with lateral epicondylalgia.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03225404 (Effectiveness of Percutaneous Electrolysis in the Treatment of Lateral Epicondylalgia. A Single-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Effectiveness of Percutaneous Electrolysis in the Treatment of Lateral Epicondylalgia. A Single-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Quality of Care Indicators for Hospital Physical Therapy Units: A Systematic Review.Physical therapy · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Tennis elbow.Shoulder & elbow · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLateral epicondylalgia (LE) defines a condition of varying degrees of pain near the lateral epicondyle. Studies on the management of LE indicated unexplained variations in the use of pharmacologic, non-pharmacological and surgical treatments. The main aim of this paper was to develop and evaluate clinical quality measures (QMs) or quality indicators, which may be used to assess the quality of the processes of examination, education and treatment of patients with LE.
methodsDifferent QMs were developed by a multidisciplinary group of experts in Quality Management of Health Services during a period of one year. The process was based following a 3-step model: i) review and proportion of existing evidence-based recommendations; ii) review and development of quality measures; iii) pilot testing of feasibility and reliability of the indicators leading to a final consensus by the whole panel.
resultsOverall, a set of 12 potential indicators related to medical and physical therapy assessment and treatment were developed to measure the performance of LE care. Different systematic reviews and randomized control trials supported each of the indicators judged to be valid during the expert panel process. Application of the new indicator set was found to be feasible; only the measurement of two quality measures had light barriers. Reliability was mostly excellent (Kappa > 0.8).
conclusionsA set of good practice indicators has been built and pilot tested as feasible and reliable. The chosen 3-step standardized evidence-based process ensures maximum clarity, acceptance and sustainability of the developed indicators.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.