ICON 2019: International Scientific Tendinopathy Symposium Consensus: Clinical Terminology

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.Background Persistent tendon pain that impairs function has inconsistent medical terms that can influence choice of treatment.1 When a person is told they have tendinopathy by clinician A or tendinitis by clinician B, they might feel confused or be alarmed at receiving what they might perceive as two different diagnoses. This may lead to loss of confidence in their health professional and likely adds to uncertainty if they were to search for information about their condition. Clear and uniform terminology also assists inter-professional communication. Inconsistency in terminology for painful tendon disorders is a problem at numerous anatomical sites. Historically, the term ‘tendinitis’ was first used to describe tendon pain, thickening and impaired function (online supplementary figure S1). The term ‘tendinosis’ has also been used in a small number of publications, some of which were very influential.2 3 Subsequently, ‘tendinopathy’ emerged as the most common term for persistent tendon pain.4 5 To our knowledge, experts (clinicians and researchers) or patients have never engaged in a formal process to discuss the terminology we use. We believe that health professionals have not yet agreed on the appropriate terminology for painful tendon conditions.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

Targeted physiotherapy for patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis: A protocol for a randomised, single-blind controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The patellofemoral joint (PFJ) is one compartment of the knee that is frequently affected by osteoarthritis (OA) and is a potent source of OA symptoms. However, there is a dearth of evidence for compartment-specific treatments for PFJ OA. Therefore, this project aims to evaluate whether a physiotherapy treatment, targeted to the PFJ, results in greater improvements in pain and physical function than a physiotherapy education intervention in people with symptomatic and radiographic PFJ OA.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>90 people with PFJ OA (PFJ-specific history, signs and symptoms and radiographic evidence of PFJ OA) will be recruited from the community and randomly allocated into one of two treatments. A randomised controlled trial adhering to CONSORT guidelines will evaluate the efficacy of physiotherapy (8 individual sessions over 12 weeks, as well as a home exercise program 4 times/week) compared to a physiotherapist-delivered OA education control treatment (8 individual sessions over 12 weeks). Physiotherapy treatment will consist of (i) quadriceps muscle retraining; (ii) quadriceps and hip muscle strengthening; (iii) patellar taping; (iv) manual PFJ and soft tissue mobilisation; and (v) OA education. Resistance and dosage of exercises will be tailored to the participant's functional level and clinical state. Primary outcomes will be evaluated by a blinded examiner at baseline, 12 weeks and 9 months using validated and reliable pain, physical function and perceived global effect scales. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis using linear mixed regression models, including respective baseline scores as a covariate, subjects as a random effect, treatment condition as a fixed factor and the covariate by treatment interaction.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This RCT is targeting PFJ OA, an important sub-group of knee OA patients, with a specifically designed conservative intervention. The project's outcome will influence PFJ OA rehabilitation, with the potential to reduce the personal and societal burden of this increasing public health problem.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12608000288325</p

Optimising corticosteroid injection for lateral epicondylalgia with the addition of physiotherapy: A protocol for a randomised control trial with placebo comparison

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Corticosteroid injection and physiotherapy are two commonly prescribed interventions for management of lateral epicondylalgia. Corticosteroid injections are the most clinically efficacious in the short term but are associated with high recurrence rates and delayed recovery, while physiotherapy is similar to injections at 6 weeks but with significantly lower recurrence rates. Whilst practitioners frequently recommend combining physiotherapy and injection to overcome harmful effects and improve outcomes, study of the benefits of this combination of treatments is lacking. Clinicians are also faced with the paradox that the powerful anti-inflammatory corticosteroid injections work well, albeit in the short term, for a non-inflammatory condition like lateral epicondylalgia. Surprisingly, these injections have not been rigorously tested against placebo injections. This study primarily addresses both of these issues.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial with a 2 × 2 factorial design will evaluate the clinical efficacy, cost-effectiveness and recurrence rates of adding physiotherapy to an injection. In addition, the clinical efficacy and adverse effects of corticosteroid injection beyond that of a placebo saline injection will be studied. 132 participants with a diagnosis of lateral epicondylalgia will be randomly assigned by concealed allocation to one of four treatment groups – corticosteroid injection, saline injection, corticosteroid injection with physiotherapy or saline injection with physiotherapy. Physiotherapy will comprise 8 sessions of elbow manipulation and exercise over an 8 week period. Blinded follow-up assessments will be conducted at baseline, 4, 8, 12, 26 and 52 weeks after randomisation. The primary outcome will be a participant rating of global improvement, from which measures of success and recurrence will be derived. Analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis using linear mixed and logistic regression models. Healthcare costs will be collected from a societal perspective, and along with willingness-to-pay and quality of life data will facilitate cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This trial will utilise high quality trial methodologies in accordance with CONSORT guidelines. Findings from this study will assist in the development of evidence based practice recommendations and potentially the optimisation of resource allocation for rehabilitating lateral epicondylalgia.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Register ACTRN12609000051246</p

HAPPi Kneecaps! Protocol for a participant- and assessor-blinded, randomised, parallel group feasibility trial of foot orthoses for adolescents with patellofemoral pain

BACKGROUND: Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is a common cause of knee pain in adolescents, but there are limited evidence-based treatment options for this population. Foot orthoses can improve pain and function in adults with PFP, and may be effective for adolescents. The primary aim of th

Developing Clinical and Research Priorities for Pain and Psychological Features in People With Patellofemoral Pain:An International Consensus Process With Health Care Professionals

OBJECTIVE: To decide clinical and research priorities on pain features and psychological factors in persons with patellofemoral pain. DESIGN: Consensus development process. METHODS: We undertook a 3-stage process consisting of (1) updating 2 systematic reviews on quantitative sensory testing of pain features and psychological factors in patellofemoral pain, (2) an online survey of health care professionals and persons with patellofemoral pain, and (3) a consensus meeting with expert health care professionals. Participants responded that they agreed, disagreed, or were unsure that a pain feature or psychological factor was important in clinical practice or as a research priority. Greater than 70% participant agreement was required for an item to be considered important in clinical practice or a research priority. RESULTS: Thirty-five health care professionals completed the survey, 20 of whom attended the consensus meeting. Thirty persons with patellofemoral pain also completed the survey. The review identified 5 pain features and 9 psychological factors—none reached 70% agreement in the patient survey, so all were considered at the meeting. Afte the meeting, pain catastrophizing, fear-avoidance beliefs, and pain self-efficacy were the only factors considered clinically important. All but the therma pain tests and 3 psychological factors were consid ered research priorities. CONCLUSION: Pain catastrophizing, pain self-efficacy, and fear-avoidance beliefs were factors considered important in treatment planning, clinical examination, and prognostication. Quantitative sensory tests for pain were not regarded as clinically important but were deemed to be research priorities, as were most psychological factors.</p

Non-surgical treatment of hallux valgus: a current practice survey of Australian podiatrists

Background: Patients with hallux valgus (HV) frequently present to podiatrists for non-surgical management, with a wide range of concerns including pain, footwear difficulty and quality of life impacts. There is little research evidence guiding podiatrists' clinical decisions surrounding non-surgical management of HV. Thus practitioners rely largely upon clinical experience and expert opinion. This survey was conducted to determine whether a consensus exists among Australian podiatrists regarding non-surgical treatment of HV, and secondly to explore common presenting concerns and physical examination findings associated with HV