Vibration therapy versus standard treatment for tennis elbow: A randomized controlled study

Area of Science:

• Orthopedics
• Physical Therapy
• Biomedical Engineering

Background:

• Tennis elbow (TE), or lateral epicondylitis, is a common condition causing elbow pain and functional limitation.
• Standard treatments include physiotherapy, activity modification, and analgesia.
• Novel therapeutic approaches are being investigated to improve patient outcomes.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate the efficacy of a high-frequency vibration device (Tenease™) as an adjunct to standard treatment for tennis elbow.
• To compare pain and functional improvements in patients receiving standard treatment versus standard treatment plus vibration therapy.

Main Methods:

• A randomized controlled trial was conducted with adult patients diagnosed with tennis elbow.
• Participants were assigned to either standard treatment or standard treatment plus Tenease™ therapy for six weeks.
• Primary outcome: quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) score at six months. Secondary outcomes: Patient Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) score and EuroQol 5-Dimension Visual Analogue Scale (EQ-5D VAS).

Main Results:

• Both groups showed improvement in QuickDASH scores at six months, but the difference between groups was not statistically significant.
• No significant differences were observed between the vibration therapy group and the standard treatment group for primary or secondary outcome measures at any time point.
• The study experienced a high dropout rate, with 18 patients in the standard group and 27 in the Tenease group completing the study.

Conclusions:

• High-frequency vibration therapy, using the Tenease™ device, did not demonstrate a statistically significant improvement in functional outcomes for tennis elbow compared to standard treatment.
• The findings suggest that vibration therapy may not be an effective standalone or adjunctive treatment for this condition.
• Limitations include a small sample size and a high dropout rate, indicating a need for larger, more robust studies.