Cited by 77Tendon Structure and TreatmentErgonomics and Musculoskeletal DisordersOccupational Health and Safety in Workplaces

Lateral Epicondylitis and Physical Exposure at Work? A Review of Prospective Studies and Meta-Analysis

Descatha, Alexis, Albo, Francesco, Leclerc, Annette, Carton, Matthieu, Godeau, Diane, Roquelaure, Yves, Petit, Audrey, Aublet‐Cuvelier, Agnès·2016·Arthritis Care & Research

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In view of recent published studies, a meta-analysis was undertaken on prospective studies in order to assess any association between lateral epicondylitis and physical exposure at work. METHODS: Using the key words "lateral epicondylitis" AND "occupational" AND ("cohort" OR "longitudinal," OR "incidence") without limitations on the language or year of publication, original prospective studies were selected from 4 databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Base de Données de Santé Publique) after 2 rounds (valid design, valid association reported, and valid work exposure). Relevant associations between physical exposure at work and incident lateral epicondylitis were extracted from the articles, and a meta-risk was calculated using the generic variance approach (meta-odds ratios [meta-ORs]). RESULTS: From 2001 to 2014, 5 prospective studies were included. Among 6,922 included subjects (and 3,449 who were followed), 256 cases of incident lateral epicondylitis were diagnosed 2.5-6 years after baseline. All the published studies found a significant estimation of relative risk for a positive association between combined biomechanic exposure involving the wrist and/or elbow and incidence of lateral epicondylitis. The overall meta-OR was 2.6 (95% confidence interval 1.9-3.5), with a low heterogeneity (Q = 1.4, P > 0.05). Funnel plots and Egger's test did not suggest major publication bias. CONCLUSION: The results of this meta-analysis strongly support the hypothesis of an association between biomechanic exposure involving the wrist and/or elbow at work and incidence of lateral epicondylitis.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/acr.22874

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 33 · Cited by 77

Authors
Descatha, A., Albo, F., Leclerc, A., Carton, M., Godeau, D., Roquelaure, Y., Petit, A., & Aublet‐Cuvelier, A.
Affiliations
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers (FR)
  • Université d'Angers (FR)
Venue
Arthritis Care & Research
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2016-10-26
Volume
68
Issue
11
Pages
1681-1687
ISSN
  • 0893-7524 (ISSN-L)
  • 2151-464X
  • 2151-4658
OpenAlex
W2292246305
Cited by
77
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 4
FWCI
0.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Arthritis Care & Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Funders
Versailles St-Quentin University and Paris Hospital CRAMIF
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Tendon Structure and Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Occupational Health and Safety in Workplaces
Keywords
lateral epicondylitis, occupational exposure, wrist biomechanics, elbow biomechanics, incidence, work-related musculoskeletal disorders, risk factors
MeSH terms
Adult, Elbow, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Occupational Diseases, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Tennis Elbow, Wrist, Incidence, Odds Ratio, Occupational Exposure

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review