Bracing or Kinesio Taping in The Management of Lateral Epicondylitis

NCT04498533 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: 127/29.05.2014
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 72
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

Lateral epicondylitis is an overuse syndrome of the forearm, which is associated with pain and sensitivity in the lateral elbow region. The aim of the study was to find out about is there any difference between the effects of traditional orthotic devices and adhesive taping, in the management of lateral epicondylitis. Therefore, the forearm counterforce brace, which was widely used in daily clinical practice for lateral epicondylitis, was compared with kinesio tape, a new technique of adhesive taping which has become increasingly popular. The study investigated and compared the effects of the two interventions (the forearm counterforce brace and kinesio tape) on pain severity, functional status and disability of patients with lateral epicondylitis.

Conditions

Lateral Epicondylitis (Tennis Elbow)

Keywords

Lateral epicondylitis; forearm counterforce brace; kinesio taping

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (2)

• Pain Pressure Threshold

  The tenderness on the lateral aspect of elbow was evaluated with pain pressure threshold measurements. An algometer device was used to measure pain pressure threshold. Pain pressure threshold measurements were performed at the baseline of the study, immediately after and one month later after treatment.

  Baseline to 3 week (İmmediately after treatment)

• Grip Strength

  Affected upper limb function was evaluated with maximal hand grip strength. Grip strength was measured with a hydraulic hand dynamometer. Grip strength was evaluated at the baseline of the study, immediately after and one month later after treatment.

  Baseline to 3 week (İmmediately after treatment)

Secondary Outcomes (1)

• Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation Questionnaire

  0 week (Baseline), 3 week (After treatment), 7 week (One month later after treatment)

Study Arms (2)

B (brace) group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

The patients in the B group were informed about the application of the forearm strap (counterforce brace). Patients were advised to wear the counterforce brace for three weeks continuously.

Other: forearm strap (counterforce brace)

KT (kinesio tape) group

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

In the KT group, a standard 2-inch (5 cm) Kinesio®Tex tape (Kinesio Holding Corporation, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA) was used with techniques of muscle inhibition and fascia correction. Kinesio tape was applied once a week for four weeks.

Other: Kinesio tape application

Interventions

forearm strap (counterforce brace) OTHER

B (brace) group

Kinesio tape application OTHER

KT (kinesio tape) group

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years - 65 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• aged between 18 and 65 years
• presence of elbow pain lasting for less than three months

You may not qualify if:

• history of acute trauma or fracture on forearm
• congenital or acquired elbow deformities
• demyelinating diseases
• patients who had diagnosed as fibromyalgia
• presence of skin lesion on lateral aspect of the elbow
• presence of rheumatic disease
• presence of systemic infection
• presence of pregnancy
• presence of malignancy

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Haseki Training and Research Hospital: lead

Study Sites (1)

University of Health Sciences, Istanbul Haseki Training and Research Hospital

Istanbul, 34130, Turkey (Türkiye)

Location

Related Publications (1)

• Struijs PA, Smidt N, Arola H, Dijk vC, Buchbinder R, Assendelft WJ. Orthotic devices for the treatment of tennis elbow. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002;(1):CD001821. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001821.

  PMID: 11869609 RESULT

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Tennis Elbow

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Elbow Tendinopathy; Tendinopathy; Muscular Diseases; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Elbow Injuries; Arm Injuries; Wounds and Injuries; Tendon Injuries

Study Officials

• Öznur Çelik, MD

  University of Health Sciences, Istanbul Haseki Training and Research Hospital

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
• Masking Details: The outcome-assessing investigator (O. Celik) was blinded to the randomization. All study participants were assessed by the blinded investigator (O.Celik). Follow-up measurements were performed immediately after and one month later after treatment. All treatment sessions were applied by the same investigator (S. Sencan), who was not blinded to the study groups.
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Principal Investigator

Model Details: A prospective, randomized and assessor-blinded study

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: July 15, 2020
• First Posted: August 4, 2020
• Study Start: June 1, 2014
• Primary Completion: July 31, 2017
• Study Completion: January 31, 2018
• Last Updated: August 4, 2020

Record last verified: 2020-08

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

TU (1)