Development of a core outcome set for lateral elbow tendinopathy (COS-LET) using best available evidence and an international consensus process.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a core outcome set for lateral elbow tendinopathy (COS-LET) and to provide guidance for outcome evaluation in future studies. METHODS: We implemented a multi-stage mixed-methods design combining two systematic reviews, domain mapping of outcome measurement instruments to the core domains of tendinopathy, psychometric analysis of instruments, two patient focus groups and a Delphi study incorporating two surveys and an international consensus meeting. Following the OMERACT guidelines, we used a 70% threshold for consensus. RESULTS: 38 clinicians/researchers and 9 patients participated. 60 instruments were assessed for inclusion. The only instrument that was recommended for the COS-LET was Patient Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) for the disability domain. Interim recommendations were made to use: the PRTEE function subscale for the function domain; PRTEE pain subscale items 1, 4 and 5 for the pain over a specified time domain; pain-free grip strength for the physical function capacity domain; a Numerical Rating Scale measuring pain on gripping for the pain on activity/loading domain; and time off work for the participation in life activities domain. No recommendations could be made for the quality-of-life, patient rating of condition and psychological factors domains. CONCLUSIONS: The COS-LET comprises the PRTEE for the disability domain. Interim-use recommendations included PRTEE subscales, time off work, pain-free grip strength and a Numerical Rating Scale measuring pain on gripping. Further work is required to validate these interim measures and develop suitable measures to capture the other domains.

Rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair: A multi-centre pilot & feasibility randomised controlled trial (RaCeR).

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of early patient-directed rehabilitation versus standard rehabilitation following surgical repair of the rotator cuff of the shoulder. DESIGN: Two-arm, multi-centre pilot and feasibility randomised controlled trial. SETTING: Five National Health Service hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (n = 73) with non-traumatic rotator cuff tears scheduled for repair were recruited and randomly allocated remotely prior to surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Early patient-directed rehabilitation (n = 37); advised to remove their sling as soon as able and move as symptoms allow. Standard rehabilitation (n = 36); sling immobilisation for four weeks. MEASURES: (1) Randomisation of 20% or more eligible patients. (2) Difference in time out of sling of 40% or more between groups. (3) Follow-up greater than 70%. RESULTS: 73/185 (39%) potentially eligible patients were randomised. Twenty participants were withdrawn, 11 due to not receiving rotator cuff repair. The between-group difference in proportions of participants who exceeded the cut-off of 222.6 hours out of the sling was 50% (80% CI = 29%, 72%), with the early patient-directed rehabilitation group reporting greater time out of sling. 52/73 (71%) and 52/53 (98%) participants were followed-up at 12 weeks when withdrawals were included and excluded respectively. Eighteen full-thickness re-tears were reported (early patient-directed rehabilitation = 7, standard rehabilitation = 11). Five serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: A main randomised controlled trial is feasible but would require allocation of participants following surgery to counter the issue of withdrawal due to not receiving surgery.

A loaded self-managed exercise programme for patellofemoral pain: a mixed methods feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: A novel loaded self-managed exercise programme that includes pain education and self-management strategies may result in better outcomes for people with patellofemoral pain (PFP). However, establishing program feasibility is an essential first step before testing efficacy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of conducting a definitive RCT which will evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of a loaded self-managed exercise programme for people with PFP compared with usual physiotherapy. METHODS: In a mixed methods, pragmatic, randomised controlled feasibility study, 60 participants with PFP (57% female; mean age 29 years) were recruited from a physiotherapy clinic within a large UK teaching hospital. They were randomly allocated to receive either a loaded self-managed exercise programme (n = 30) or usual physiotherapy (n = 30). Feasibility indicators of process, resources, and management were collected through follow-up of standardised questionnaires six months after recruitment and semi-structured interviews with 20 participants and physiotherapists. RESULTS: Recruitment rate was 5 participants per month; consent rate was 99%; adherence to intervention appointments was 87%; completeness of questionnaire data was 100%; and adherence to intervention delivery was 95%. Three exercise diaries were returned at six months (5%). At six months, 25 questionnaire booklets were returned (9 in the loaded self-managed group, 16 in the usual physiotherapy group), with a total retention rate of 42%. At six months, 56% (5/9) of respondents in the loaded self-managed group and 56% (9/16) in the usual physiotherapy group were classified as 'recovered'. Both groups demonstrated improvements in average pain (VAS), kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing, general self-efficacy and EQ-5D-5 L from baseline to six months. CONCLUSION: The results of this feasibility study confirm that it is feasible and acceptable to deliver a loaded self-managed exercise programme to adults with PFP in an NHS physiotherapy outpatient setting. However, between group differences in lost to follow up and poor exercise diary completion mean we are uncertain on some feasibility aspects. These methodological issues need addressing prior to conducting a definitive RCT. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 35272486 . Registered 19th December 2016.

Current management strategies for patellofemoral pain: an online survey of 99 practising UK physiotherapists.

BACKGROUND: Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is considered one of the commonest forms of knee pain. This study aimed to identify how physiotherapists in the United Kingdom (UK) currently manage patellofemoral pain (PFP), particularly in relation to exercise prescription, and response to pain. METHODS: An anonymous survey was designed with reference to previous surveys and recent systematic reviews. Practising UK physiotherapists who treat patients with PFP were invited to take part via an invitation email sent through professional networks, the 'interactive Chartered Society of Physiotherapy (iCSP)' message board, and social media (Twitter). Descriptive statistics were used to analyse the data. RESULTS: A total of 99 surveys were completed. Responders reported a wide range of management strategies, including a broad selection of type and dose of exercise prescription. The five most common management strategies chosen were: closed chain strengthening exercises (98%); education and advice (96%); open chain strengthening exercises (76%); taping (70%) and stretches (65%). Physiotherapists with a special interest in treating PFP were statistically more likely to manage patients with orthotics (P = 0.02) and bracing (P = 0.01) compared to physiotherapists without a special interest. Approximately 55% would not prescribe an exercise if it was painful. Thirty-one percent of physiotherapists would advise patients not to continue with leisure and/or sporting activity if they experienced any pain. CONCLUSION: Current UK practice in the management strategies of PFP is variable. Further high quality research on which to inform physiotherapy practice is warranted for this troublesome musculoskeletal condition.

Should exercises be painful in the management of chronic musculoskeletal pain? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic musculoskeletal disorders are a prevalent and costly global health issue. A new form of exercise therapy focused on loading and resistance programmes that temporarily aggravates a patient's pain has been proposed. The object of this review was to compare the effect of exercises where pain is allowed/encouraged compared with non-painful exercises on pain, function or disability in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain within randomised controlled trials. METHODS: Two authors independently selected studies and appraised risk of bias. Methodological quality was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment system was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. RESULTS: The literature search identified 9081 potentially eligible studies. Nine papers (from seven trials) with 385 participants met the inclusion criteria. There was short- term significant difference in pain, with moderate quality evidence for a small effect size of -0.27 (-0.54 to -0.05) in favour of painful exercises. For pain in the medium and long term, and function and disability in the short, medium and long term, there was no significant difference. CONCLUSION: Protocols using painful exercises offer a small but significant benefit over pain-free exercises in the short term, with moderate quality of evidence. In the medium and long term there is no clear superiority of one treatment over another. Pain during therapeutic exercise for chronic musculoskeletal pain need not be a barrier to successful outcomes. Further research is warranted to fully evaluate the effectiveness of loading and resistance programmes into pain for chronic musculoskeletal disorders. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42016038882.

A self-managed single exercise programme versus usual physiotherapy treatment for rotator cuff tendinopathy: a randomised controlled trial (the SELF study).

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a self-managed single exercise programme versus usual physiotherapy treatment for rotator cuff tendinopathy. DESIGN: Multi-centre pragmatic unblinded parallel group randomised controlled trial. SETTING: UK National Health Service. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with a clinical diagnosis of rotator cuff tendinopathy. INTERVENTIONS: The intervention was a programme of self-managed exercise prescribed by a physiotherapist in relation to the most symptomatic shoulder movement. The control group received usual physiotherapy treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was the Shoulder Pain & Disability Index (SPADI) at three months. Secondary outcomes included the SPADI at six and twelve months. RESULTS: A total of 86 patients (self-managed loaded exercise n=42; usual physiotherapy n=44) were randomised. Twenty-six patients were excluded from the analysis because of lack of primary outcome data at the 3 months follow-up, leaving 60 (n=27; n=33) patients for intention to treat analysis. For the primary outcome, the mean SPADI score at three months was 32.4 (SD 20.2) for the self-managed group, and 30.7 (SD 19.7) for the usual physiotherapy treatment group; mean difference adjusted for baseline score: 3.2 (95% Confidence interval -6.0 to +12.4 P = 0.49).By six and twelve months there remained no significant difference between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study does not provide sufficient evidence of superiority of one intervention over the other in the short-, mid- or long-term and hence a self-management programme based around a single exercise appears comparable to usual physiotherapy treatment.

Can we develop consensus on long-term follow-up and surveillance of primary shoulder arthroplasty? A study protocol using a real-time Delphi technique among expert clinicians in the UK.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder arthroplasty incidence is projected to continue its exponential growth and the resultant burden of monitoring patients with shoulder arthroplasty implants creates significant pressure on orthopaedic services. Surveillance offers the opportunity to study implant longevity, detect failing implants and potentially perform revision at lower morbidity and cost. There is a paucity of evidence to support recommendations on long-term follow-up in shoulder arthroplasty. Prospective studies comparing long-term follow-up and structure are impractical from time, resource and cost perspectives. A real-time Delphi technique represents a mechanism by which experts involved in long-term follow-up of primary shoulder arthroplasty can formulate recommendations via a transparent, reproducible and efficient process. We outline the protocol for a real-time Delphi study seeking consensus on long-term follow-up and surveillance of primary shoulder arthroplasty . METHODS: A real-time Delphi technique will be used. A planning committee will design the Delphi statements. A steering committee will supervise and monitor the real-time Delphi process. Participants will be asked to rate their agreement with statements using a 5-point Likert scale. The Delphi statements will be derived from review of published literature, and the strength of evidence available for each statement will be provided. We will offer participation to all surgeons and extended-scope practitioners who are current members of the British Elbow & Shoulder Society (BESS) and have clinical practice involving shoulder arthroplasty follow-up. The questionnaire will be active for 4 weeks and requires a minimum of 20 participants. Consensus agreement is defined as 70% of participants selecting at least a 4-point on a 5-point Likert scale. DISCUSSION: We anticipate the outlined study will achieve consensus on long-term follow-up and surveillance of primary shoulder arthroplasty. We intend to use the expert consensus recommendations achieved, in addition to the limited applicable published evidence available, to produce BESS-affiliated guidelines on long-term follow-up and surveillance of primary shoulder arthroplasty.EthicsEthical approval is not required for the real-time Delphi study.We expect the results of this initiative will be published in a peer-reviewed, high-impact journal.

Assessing the use of the frequency, etiology, direction, and severity classification system for shoulder instability in physical therapy research - A scoping review.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to review the implementation of the Frequency, Etiology, Direction, and Severity (FEDS) classification for shoulder instability by the physical therapy scientific community since its publication in 2011. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted on January 10, 2024 in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and SciELO databases, as well as Google Scholar. Studies investigating physical therapy interventions in people with shoulder instability, and reporting selection criteria for shoulder instability were considered eligible. A narrative synthesis was conducted. RESULTS: Twenty-six studies were included. None reported using the FEDS classification as eligibility criteria for shoulder instability. Only 42% of the studies provided data of all four criteria of the FEDS classification. The most reported criterion was direction (92%), followed by etiology (85%), severity (65%), and frequency (58%). The most common reported descriptor for profiling shoulder instability was "dislocation" (83.3%), followed by "first-time" (66.7%), "anterior" (62.5%), and "traumatic" (59.1%). Regarding other instability classifications, only one study (4%) used the Thomas & Matsen classification, and two (8%) the Stanmore classification. CONCLUSIONS: The FEDS classification system has not been embraced enough by the physical therapy scientific community since its publication in 2011.

Exploring the feasibility and acceptance of an optimised physiotherapy approach for lateral elbow tendinopathy: a qualitative investigation within the OPTimisE trial.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the acceptability of an optimised physiotherapy (OPTimisE) intervention for people with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) and feasibility of comparing it to usual care in a randomised controlled trial. DESIGN: Semistructured interviews, analysed using thematic analysis and mapped onto the COM-B model of behaviour change. SETTING: Conducted as part of the OPTimisE Pilot & Feasibility randomised controlled trial within physiotherapy departments in the United Kingdom National Health Service. PARTICIPANTS: 17 patients with LET (purposively sampled to provide representativeness based on age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation index and treatment allocation) and all 8 physiotherapists involved as treating clinicians or site principal investigators. RESULTS: Four themes were identified. First, participants reported the OPTimisE intervention as acceptable. Second, differences between the OPTimisE intervention and usual care were identified, including the use of an orthosis, holistic advice/education including modifiable risk factors, forearm stretches, general upper body strengthening and a more prescriptive exercise-dosing regimen. Third, participants provided feedback related to the trial resources, which were viewed positively, but identified language translation as a need. Fourth, feedback related to trial processes identified the need for changes to outcome collection and reduction of administrative burden. From the perspective of adopting the OPTimisE intervention, we found evidence that participants were able to change their behaviour. Considering the findings through the lens of the COM-B model, the intervention is likely to be deliverable in practice and the trial can be delivered at scale with some additional support for physiotherapists. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the OPTimisE intervention was found to be different to usual care and acceptable to patients and physiotherapists. The study highlighted the need to refine trial processes and resources prior to a full-scale trial, to reduce administrative burden, increase support for physiotherapists, improve return rate of outcome questionnaires and provide language translation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN database 19 July 2021. https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN64444585.

Rehabilitation following shoulder arthroscopic stabilisation surgery: A survey of UK practice.

Background: Optimal rehabilitation following arthroscopic shoulder stabilisation for traumatic anterior instability is unknown. The purpose of this study was to establish current UK practice for this patient group. Methods: A self-administered online questionnaire was developed and distributed to UK surgeons and physiotherapists. Results: 138 responses were received. Routine immobilisation was reported in 79.7% of responses with a cross-body sling being the preferred position (63.4%). Duration of immobilisation and timescales to initiate movement were highly variable. Return to light work was advised when patients felt able (25.4%) or after 6 weeks (26.1%). 58.7% recommended waiting for 12 weeks to return to manual work. 56% recommended non-contact sport could be resumed after 12 weeks. For contact sport, recommendations varied from 6 weeks (3.8%) to 6 months (5.8%). Psychological readiness was the most frequently cited criteria for return to play (58.6%). Factors such as hyperlaxity (40.6%), age (32.6%) and kinesiophobia (28.3%) were not considered as relevant as reported quality of surgical fixation (50%). Conclusion: There is no clear consensus regarding optimal post-operative rehabilitation following arthroscopic shoulder stabilisation. Further work is required to establish high value, personalised pathways for this patient group.

Rehabilitation guidelines following arthroscopic shoulder stabilisation surgery for traumatic instability - a Delphi consensus.

BACKGROUND: There is no consistent approach to rehabilitation following arthroscopic shoulder stabilisation surgery (ASSS) in the UK. The aim of this study was to agree a set of post-operative guidelines for clinical practice. METHOD: Expert stakeholders (surgeons, physiotherapists and patients) were identified via professional networks and patient involvement and engagements groups. A three-stage online Delphi study was undertaken. Consensus was defined by the OMERACT threshold of 70% agreement. RESULTS: 11 surgeons, 22 physiotherapists and 4 patients participated. It was agreed patients should be routinely immobilised in a sling for up to 3 weeks but can discard earlier if able. During the immobilisation period, patients should move only within a defined "safe zone." Permitted functional activities include using cutlery, lifting a drink, slicing bread, using kitchen utensils, wiping a table, light dusting, pulling up clothing, washing/drying dishes. Closing car doors or draining saucepans should be avoided. Through range movements can commence after 4 weeks, resisted movements at 6 weeks. Patients can resume light work as they feel able and return to manual work after 12 weeks. Return to non-contact sports when functional markers for return to play are met was agreed. Return to contact sport is based on function & confidence after a minimum of 12 weeks. Additional factors to consider when determining rehabilitation progression: functional/physical milestones, patient's confidence and presence of kinesiophobia. The preferred outcome measure is the Oxford Instability Shoulder Score. CONCLUSION: This consensus provides expert recommendations for the development of rehabilitation guidelines following ASSS. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PAPER.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of individualised (early) patient-directed rehabilitation versus standard rehabilitation after surgical repair of the rotator cuff of the shoulder: protocol for a multicentre, randomised controlled trial with integrated Quintet Recruitment Intervention (RaCeR 2).

INTRODUCTION: Despite the high number of operations and surgical advancement, rehabilitation after rotator cuff repair has not progressed for over 20 years. The traditional cautious approach might be contributing to suboptimal outcomes. Our aim is to assess whether individualised (early) patient-directed rehabilitation results in less shoulder pain and disability at 12 weeks after surgical repair of full-thickness tears of the rotator cuff compared with current standard (delayed) rehabilitation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The rehabilitation after rotator cuff repair (RaCeR 2) study is a pragmatic multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial with internal pilot phase. It has a parallel group design with 1:1 allocation ratio, full health economic evaluation and quintet recruitment intervention. Adults awaiting arthroscopic surgical repair of a full-thickness tear are eligible to participate. On completion of surgery, 638 participants will be randomised. The intervention (individualised early patient-directed rehabilitation) includes advice to the patient to remove their sling as soon as they feel able, gradually begin using their arm as they feel able and a specific exercise programme. Sling removal and movement is progressed by the patient over time according to agreed goals and within their own pain and tolerance. The comparator (standard rehabilitation) includes advice to the patient to wear the sling for at least 4 weeks and only to remove while eating, washing, dressing or performing specific exercises. Progression is according to specific timeframes rather than as the patient feels able. The primary outcome measure is the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index total score at 12-week postrandomisation. The trial timeline is 56 months in total, from September 2022. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN11499185.

A Comparison Between Preoperative and Intraoperative Measurement and Classification of the Size of Rotator Cuff Tears.

Purpose To evaluate the agreement in tear size obtained through preoperative imaging and intraoperative measurement, and to determine the accuracy of preoperative imaging in the classification of tear size and identification of tears in each rotator cuff tendon. Methods Data from 44 patients recruited to a randomized controlled trial were reviewed retrospectively. Size and location of the rotator cuff tears were confirmed by either ultrasound or magnetic resonance imaging scans preoperatively and evaluated during surgery. A t -test and Bland and Altman plot were used to determine the agreement between the preoperative and intraoperative measurements. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated for tear size and involvement of the rotator cuff tendon. Results There was good agreement in terms of the measurements (91%) and classification (89%) of the tear size preoperatively and during surgery. When classifying tear size, the sensitivity and PPV were high for medium-sized tears (100%) and lower for large tears (75%), reflecting that all medium-sized tears but not all large tears were identified preoperatively. For the preoperative identification of the tears, the sensitivity and PPV were highest for the supraspinatus (84%), with progressively lower sensitivities and PPV for the infraspinatus (57%), subscapularis (17%) and teres minor (0%). Conclusions Through preoperative imaging, the measurement or classification of the tear size can be accurately performed. Where there is disagreement, it is unclear whether the tear size is either underestimated on the scan or overestimated during surgery. The high sensitivity demonstrates that a supraspinatus tear is usually detected by scan. The lower sensitivities for the infraspinatus and subscapularis indicate that the identification of tears in these tendons is less accurate.

Lived experience of people with lateral elbow tendinopathy: a qualitative study from the OPTimisE pilot and feasibility trial.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the lived experience of people with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) and its impact on everyday life. DESIGN: Qualitative semi-structured interviews, analysed using thematic analysis. SETTING: Conducted as part of the mixed-methods OPTimisE pilot and feasibility randomised controlled trial of outpatient physiotherapy patients in the UK. PARTICIPANTS: 17 participants with LET, purposively sampled from the trial to provide representativeness based on age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation index and treatment allocation. RESULTS: Four themes were identified from the participants' responses: (1) cause of onset-typically symptoms were attributed to: sudden changes in activity, repetitive work or compensating for other musculoskeletal conditions; (2) impact on everyday life-which included substantial impacts on quality-of-life, particularly due to pain disturbing sleep and difficulties performing daily tasks (related to work and hobbies) due to pain, although most reported being able to persevere with work; (3) self-help and understanding of the condition-with uncertainty about the appropriateness and potential harm of online advice and confusion from the diagnostic term 'Tennis Elbow' that non-sporting individuals struggled to relate to; (4) healthcare experiences-the treatments received were highly variable and often perceived as ineffectual. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time, the lived experience of people from a range of backgrounds suffering from LET has been explored. Findings suggest that people frequently related the cause to a specific activity. They reported substantial impacts on daily tasks, sleep, work and hobbies. People also reported hesitancy to trust online information without formal healthcare advice, were confused by the common label of 'Tennis Elbow', and perceived the wide array of healthcare treatment options they had received to offer false hope and be largely ineffective. This study provides stimulus for clinicians to consider the advice and treatment provided, and whether the messages conveyed reflect the favourable natural history of the condition. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN64444585.

Rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair: A survey exploring clinical equipoise among surgical members of the British Elbow and Shoulder Society.

Background: We investigated clinical equipoise across surgical members of the British Elbow and Shoulder Society (BESS) in relation to rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair. Method: An online survey explored clinical equipoise regarding early patient-directed versus standard rehabilitation after rotator cuff repair to inform the design of a national randomised controlled trial (RCT). It described different clinical scenarios relating to patient age, tear size, location and whether other patient-related and intra-operative factors would influence equipoise. Results: 76 surgeons completed the survey. 81% agreed/ strongly agreed that early mobilisation might benefit recovery; 57% were neutral/ disagreed that this approach risks re-tear. 87% agreed/ strongly agreed that there is clinical uncertainty about the effectiveness of different approaches to rehabilitation. As age of the patient and tear size increased, the proportion of respondents who would agree to recruit and accept the outcome of randomisation reduced, and this was compounded if subscapularis was torn. Other factors that influenced equipoise were diabetes and non-secure repair. Conclusion: Surgical members of BESS recognise uncertainty about the effectiveness of different approaches to rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair. We identified a range of factors that influence clinical equipoise that will be considered in the design of a new RCT.

Elbow conditions: research priorities setting in partnership with the James Lind Alliance.

OBJECTIVE: To undertake a UK-based James Lind Alliance (JLA) Priority Setting Partnership for elbow conditions and be representative of the views of patients, carers and healthcare professionals (HCPs). SETTING: This was a national collaborative study organised through the British Elbow and Shoulder Society. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients, carers and HCPs who have managed or experienced elbow conditions, their carers and HCPs in the UK involved in managing of elbow conditions. METHODS: The rigorous JLA priority setting methodology was followed. Electronic and paper scoping surveys were distributed to identify potential research priority questions (RPQs). Initial responses were reviewed and a literature search was performed to cross-check categorised questions. Those questions already sufficiently answered were excluded and the remaining questions were ranked in a second survey according to priority for future elbow conditions research. Using the JLA methodology, responses from HCP and patients were combined to create a list of the top 18 questions. These were further reviewed in a dedicated multistakeholder workshop where the top 10 RPQs were agreed by consensus. RESULTS: The process was completed over 24 months. The initial survey resulted in 467 questions from 165 respondents (73% HCPs and 27% patients/carers). These questions were reviewed and combined into 46 summary topics comprising: tendinopathy, distal biceps pathology, arthritis, stiffness, trauma, arthroplasty and cubital tunnel syndrome. The second (interim prioritisation) survey had 250 respondents (72% HCP and 28% patients/carers). The top 18 ranked questions from this survey were taken to the final workshop where a consensus was reached on the top 10 RPQs. CONCLUSIONS: The top 10 RPQs highlight areas of importance that currently lack sufficient evidence to guide diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of elbow conditions. This collaborative process will guide researchers and funders regarding the topics that should receive most future attention and benefit patients and HCPs.

International physical therapists consensus on clinical descriptors for diagnosing rotator cuff related shoulder pain: A Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of standardized criteria for diagnosing rotator cuff related shoulder pain (RCRSP). OBJECTIVE: To identify the most relevant clinical descriptors for diagnosing RCRSP. METHODS: A Delphi study was conducted through use of an international physical therapists expert panel. A 3-round Delphi survey involving an international panel of physical therapists experts with extensive clinical, teaching, and research experience was conducted. A search query was performed in Web of Science, along with a manual search, to find the experts. The first round was composed of items obtained from a previous pilot Delphi study along with new items proposed by the experts. Participants were asked to rate items across six clinical domains using a five-point Likert scale. An Aiken's Validity Index ≥ 0.7 was considered indicative of group consensus. RESULTS: Fifteen experts participated in the Delphi survey. After the three rounds, consensus was reached on 18 clinical descriptors: 10 items were included in the "subjective examination" domain, 1 item was included in the "patient-reported outcome measures" domain, 3 items in the "diagnostic examination" domain, 2 items in the "physical examination" domain", and 2 items in the "functional tests" domain. No items reached consensus within the "special tests" domain. The reproduction of symptoms in relation to the application of load, the performance of overhead activities, and the need of active and resisted movement assessment were some of the results with greatest consensus. CONCLUSION: In this Delphi study, a total of 18 clinical descriptors across six clinical domains were agreed upon for diagnosing RCRSP.

Rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair: A survey of current practice (2020).

INTRODUCTION: Approaches to rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair are variable but typically include 4-6 weeks of immobilisation followed by a gradual introduction of movement and activity. However, research has questioned whether such an approach is optimal. The aim of this study was to undertake an updated survey to understand whether practice has evolved in line with contemporary research. METHODS: An electronic survey was developed describing three case scenarios (medium-sized rotator cuff repair [2 cm], large-sized rotator cuff repair [4 cm] and large-sized rotator cuff repair with biceps tenodesis). Clinicians involved with rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair were invited to participate. RESULTS: 129 responses were received (United Kingdom = 87, other regions [ORs] = 42). Respondents would most commonly recommend four to six weeks of immobilisation for all case scenarios. Passive movement would commence during this period, with active movement recommended from four to six weeks. Resisted exercise would commence between seven to 12 weeks along with return to driving. There were some minor differences in recommendations between respondents from the United Kingdom and ORs, including a greater proportion from the United Kingdom recommending sling immobilisation rather than abduction brace immobilisation. CONCLUSION: For many respondents to this survey, rehabilitation for the three case scenarios was similar and has not evolved in line with contemporary research evidence. The reasons behind this need to be explored and incorporated into the design of future research evaluating rehabilitation following rotator cuff repair.

Development of an optimised physiotherapist-led treatment protocol for lateral elbow tendinopathy: a consensus study using an online nominal group technique.

OBJECTIVES: There are a wide range of physiotherapy treatment options for people with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET); however, previous studies have reported inconsistent approaches to treatment and a lack of evidence demonstrating clinical effectiveness. This study aimed to combine the best available research evidence with stakeholder perspectives to develop key components of an optimised physiotherapist-led treatment protocol for testing in a future randomised controlled trial (RCT). DESIGN: Online consensus groups using nominal group technique (NGT), a systematic approach to building consensus using structured multistage meetings. SETTING: UK National Health Service (NHS). PARTICIPANTS: 10 physiotherapists with special interest in LET, 2 physiotherapy service managers and 3 patients who had experienced LET. INTERVENTIONS: Two consensus groups were conducted; the first meeting focused on agreeing the types of interventions to be included in the optimised treatment protocol; the second meeting focused on specific details of intervention delivery. Participants were sent an evidence summary of available treatments for LET prior to the first meeting. All treatment options were discussed before anonymous voting and ranking of priority. Consensus for inclusion of each treatment option was set at ≥70% based on OMERACT guidelines. Options with 30%-69% agreement were discussed again, and a second vote was held, allowing for a change of opinion. RESULTS: The optimised physiotherapist-led treatment package included: advice and education, exercise therapy and orthotics. Specific components for each of these interventions were also agreed such as: condition-specific advice, health-promotion advice, exercise types, exercise into 'acceptable' levels of pain, exercise dosage and type of orthoses. Other treatment options including electrotherapy, acupuncture and manual therapy were excluded. CONCLUSION: An optimised physiotherapist-led treatment protocol for people with LET was successfully developed using an online NGT consensus approach. This intervention is now ready for testing in a future pilot/feasibility RCT to contribute much needed evidence about the treatment of LET. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This is the pre-cursor to the OPTimisE Pilot and Feasibility Randomised Controlled Trial. Registration: https://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN64444585.