Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37389708›Full record

Observational studyEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2024

Arthroscopic release and decortication provide earlier return to work with similar patient satisfaction compared to continued intensive conservative therapy for recalcitrant tennis elbow: a retrospective observational study.

Arghya Kundu Choudhury, Bishwa Bandhu Niraula, Shivam Bansal, Tushar Gupta, Lakshmana Das, Tarun Goyal

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Arghya Kundu ChoudhuryDepartment of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8829-1206
Bishwa Bandhu NiraulaDepartment of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3482-4705
Shivam BansalDepartment of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3602-2952
Tushar GuptaDepartment of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6821-7594
Lakshmana DasDepartment of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bathinda, Punjab, 151001, India.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2720-6389
Tarun GoyalDepartment of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Rishikesh, Uttarakhand, 249203, India. goyal.tarun@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1428-9947
All India Institute of Medical Sciences Rishikesh · INAll India Institute of Medical Sciences · INCentral University of Punjab · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTennis elbow management has primarily been conservative over the years with over 90% of the cases being managed conservatively. Surgical intervention may be necessary only for symptomatic recalcitrant cases of tennis elbow cases. However, there are gaps in the literature when it comes to comparison of the return to pre-operative return to their work and level of activities among patients who undergo arthroscopic management and those who receive conservative management.

methodsA retrospective observational study was conducted to compare 23 patients receiving continued intensive conservative (CIC) management in group 1 with 24 patients undergoing arthroscopic release of the extensor carpi radialis brevis and lateral epicondyle decortication (ARD) in group 2. The study had a minimum follow-up period of 3.5 years. The researchers compared the groups in terms of return to work (RTW) at the same intensity or lower level and any changes in their previous work. Objective grip strength and patient-reported outcome measures, such as post-intervention satisfaction level (rated on a scale of 0-100) and visual analog scale (VAS) for residual elbow pain, were also compared between the two groups.

resultsReturn to work (RTW) occurred significantly earlier in group 2 (mean 6.13 months) compared to group 1 (mean 4.64 months), and a greater number of patients in group 2 (13/24, 54.2%) were able to return to the same of work. Although not statistically significant, the ARD group exhibited comparable patient satisfaction (p = 0.62) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores for residual elbow pain (p = 0.67). Grip strength was comparable (p = 0.084, 0.121) between the affected and unaffected sides of the bilateral upper extremities and among both groups of patients.

conclusionThe use of ARD for RTE (recalcitrant tennis elbow) indicates a significantly earlier return to work (RTW) at the same or lower intensity level compared to the standard CIC therapy protocol. Objective grip strength was comparable to the non-affected side and among the two groups of patients receiving two different management modalities. Comparable patient-reported satisfaction and residual lateral elbow pain were also noted among both the groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective, comparative study, level III.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionTennis ElbowArthralgiaArthroscopyConservative TreatmentHumansPainRetrospective StudiesReturn to WorkArthroscopic releaseContinued intensive conservative therapyElbow arthroscopyLateral epicondylitisRecalcitrant tennis elbowReturn to workSatisfactionTennis elbow

Identifiers

PMID37389708
OpenAlexW4382631127

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.