Local steroid injections for tennis elbow: does the pain get worse before it gets better?: Results from a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the early effects of local corticosteroid injection, naproxen, and placebo as treatments for tennis elbow in primary care. Specifically, to find out whether the extra pain reduction experienced by patients who are given the steroid injection in the short-term would be realized within the first 5 days of treatment and to attempt to assess how much extra pain may be associated with the injection initially. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial carried out in 23 family practices in the United Kingdom. A total of 164 patients aged 18 to 70 years presenting with a new episode of tennis elbow were recruited and invited to keep a daily record of their pain intensity and medication use over the first 5 days of randomized treatment using a "diary." RESULTS: On day 1, pain scores were higher in the injection group compared with the naproxen group and placebo group, and the injection group was also taking more painkillers. By day 4, the converse was true, pain scores were significantly lower in the injection group than the other 2 groups, and patients given an injection were less likely to be taking painkillers than those in the placebo group. DISCUSSION: Steroid injection was associated with an increase in reported pain for the first 24 hours of treatment, but the therapeutic benefits compared with naproxen and placebo were evident 3 to 4 days after the start of treatment.

What influences participants' treatment preference and can it influence outcome? Results from a primary care-based randomised trial for shoulder pain.

BACKGROUND: In randomised clinical trials (RCTs), outcome may be influenced by the opinions of the participants about the efficacy of treatments. AIM: To examine how initial treatment preferences of participants in a shoulder pain trial affected functional outcome and future treatment preferences. DESIGN OF STUDY: Observational cohort study nested within a multicentre, pragmatic RCT of steroid injection versus physiotherapy for unilateral shoulder pain. SETTING: Nine general practices in north Staffordshire. METHOD: Two hundred and seven adults were randomised in the trial. Disability scores and preferences of the participants for the trial treatments were elicited at two points: prior to randomisation and 6 months post-randomisation. A good functional outcome was defined as at least a halving in the disability score at the 6 months follow-up point. RESULTS: Pre-randomisation preferences were: 40% for injection and 20% for physiotherapy, and 40% gave no preference. A good outcome was achieved in a higher percentage of participants who gave a pre-randomisation treatment preference compared with those who did not (62% compared with 48% percentage difference = 14%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -1 to 27%) with similar percentages in each preferred treatment group. However, receiving the preferred treatment did not confer any additional benefit in those who expressed a preference (receiving preferred treatment = 56%; not receiving preferred treatment = 69%). At 6 months post-randomisation, participants with a good, as opposed to poor, outcome were more likely to report as their preferred treatment the one to which they had been randomised, irrespective of pre-randomisation preference and whether the preferred treatment was received. CONCLUSION: This analysis suggests that preferences prior to treatment can affect outcome, but that treatment outcome is a stronger influence on post-treatment preferences. We present some empirical evidence to support the statement that treatment preferences can have important effects on the results of RCTs.

Effects of manual work on recovery from lateral epicondylitis.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the influence of manual work on the persistence of lateral epicondylitis during a 12-month follow-up period after consultation in general practice. METHODS: A cohort study was made of 164 adult consulters with tennis elbow, who had initially been recruited to a randomized controlled trial from 23 general practices in North Staffordshire and South Cheshire. As part of the recruitment process prior to treatment randomization, self-reported questionnaires on symptoms and sociodemographic characteristics were completed. Four weeks, six months, and twelve months later, the schedules were repeated. The main outcomes were measures of elbow symptoms (pain and function) based on a ten-point Likert scale. Total pain and function for the whole 12-month period were assessed using an area-under-the-curve (AUC) analysis. The pain and function scores were analyzed according to employment status (manual versus nonmanual work) and severe versus mild upper-limb stress in manual occupations. RESULTS: The AUC scores for elbow pain and function were significantly higher for the manual workers, and manual work was associated with increased elbow pain and decreased function in the 4-week and 6-month follow-ups. The greater the severity of upper-limb stresses, the worse the outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Previous epidemiologic studies have shown that manual occupations are a risk factor for developing lateral epicondylitis. It is feasible that resuming manual work after treatment may hinder recovery or increase the risk of relapse. The study lends support to this hypothesis.