Article

Comparative responsiveness of four elbow scoring instruments in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands.
The Journal of Rheumatology (Impact Factor: 3.17). 01/2002; 28(12):2616-23.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT This prospective study investigated the comparative responsiveness to change of 4 different elbow scoring instruments: 2 Hospital for Special Surgery elbow assessment scales, the Mayo Clinic Elbow Performance Index, and the Elbow Functional Assessment (EFA) Scale.
A group of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) (median age 60 yrs) undergoing either elbow arthroplasty (22 elbows) or synovectomy with radial head excision (3 elbows) were evaluated both before and after surgery (median 7 mo postoperatively). Changes in the scores obtained using the scales under study were calculated and analyzed. The patient's opinion of global perceived effect of the intervention was used as an external criterion to classify them as "improved" or "non-changed." Responsiveness was evaluated with 3 different statistical approaches: using paired t statistics (pre and postsurgery scores), effect size statistics (standardized response mean, effect size, and responsiveness ratios), and receiver operator characteristic curves. Minimal clinically important difference was estimated using patient satisfaction as the external criterion.
Each of the elbow rating measures under study proved to be responsive to change when evaluating patients with RA undergoing elbow arthroplasty or synovectomy. The EFA scale had the highest power to detect a clinically meaningful difference and had the best discriminative ability to distinguish improved from no-change patients, as shown by all responsiveness statistics applied.
Using the EFA scale requires smaller sample sizes to achieve a fixed level of statistical power than the other scales we studied.

0 Followers
 · 
75 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background. Autologous whole blood and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) have been both suggested to treat chronic tennis elbow. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of PRP versus autologous whole blood local injection in chronic tennis elbow. Methods. Forty patients with tennis elbow were randomly divided into 2 groups. Group 1 was treated with a single injection of 2 mL of autologous PRP and group 2 with 2 mL of autologous blood. Tennis elbow strap, stretching, and strengthening exercises were administered for both groups during a 2-month followup. Pain and functional improvements were assessed using visual analog scale (VAS), modified Mayo Clinic performance index for the elbow, and pressure pain threshold (PPT) at 0, 4, and 8 weeks. Results. All pain and functional variables including VAS, PPT, and Mayo scores improved significantly in both groups 4 weeks after injection. No statistically significant difference was noted between groups regarding pain scores in 4-week follow-up examination (P > 0.05). At 8-week reevaluations, VAS and Mayo scores improved only in PRP group (P < 0.05). Conclusion. PRP and autologous whole blood injections are both effective to treat chronic lateral epicondylitis. PRP might be slightly superior in 8-week followup. However, further studies are suggested to get definite conclusion.
    01/2014; 2014:191525. DOI:10.1155/2014/191525
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Lateral humeral epicondylitis, or 'tennis elbow', is a common condition with a variety of treatment options. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and Autologous Whole Blood(AWB) represent new therapeutic options for chronic tendinopathies including tennis elbow. The aim of the present study was to compare the long term effects of PRP versus autologous whole blood local injection in patients with chronic tennis elbow. Seventy six patients with chronic lateral humeral epicondylitis with duration of symptoms more than 3 months were included in this study and randomized into 2 groups. Group 1 was treated with a single injection of 2 mL of autologous leukocyte rich PRP (4.8 times of plasma) and group 2 with 2 mL of AWB. Tennis elbow strap, stretching and strengthening exercises were administered for both groups. Pain and functional improvements were assessed using visual analogue scale (VAS), Mayo score (modified Mayo Clinic performance index for the elbow) and pressure pain threshold (PPT) at 0, 4, 8 weeks and 6 and 12 months. All pain variables including VAS, PPT and Mayo scores improved significantly in both groups at each follow up intervals compared to baseline. No statistically significant difference was noted between groups regarding pain, functional scores and treatment success rates in all follow up examinations (P >0/05). PRP and autologous whole blood injections are both effective methods to treat chronic lateral epicondylitis and their efficacy persisted during long term follow up. PRP was not superior to AWB in long term follow up.
    03/2014; 6(1):12. DOI:10.1186/2052-1847-6-12
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Nerve transfers Oberlin-type are currently used in upper brachial plexus lesions to recover elbow flexion. Is the regained active motion sufficient to resume heavy manual activities? Five adult patients (mean age 37 years) operated of a nerve transfer to recover elbow flexion (transfer of a motor fascicle of the ulnar nerve to the motor branch of the biceps; in three patients, additional transfer from the median to the motor nerve of the brachialis) were clinically and isokinetically evaluated, after a mean follow-up of 47 months. The median Constant-Murley score was 22/100, the DASH 56/100 and the MEPI 60/100. For isokinetic tests the most significant finding was a severe deficit of elbow strength, of about 80%. No patient was able to maintain an isometric contraction during sufficient time to evaluate fatigability. This preliminary study suggests that major functional impairments persist despite early recovery of elbow flexion. These results should be confirmed in a study on a larger group of patients.
    Hand Surgery 08/2014; 19(03):1-7. DOI:10.1142/S0218810414500245

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
41 Downloads
Available from
May 16, 2014