Dataset Information

Medical Interventions for Patellofemoral Pain and Patellofemoral Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT: Patellofemoral pain (PFP) and patellofemoral osteoarthritis (PFOA) are common, persistent conditions that may lie along a pathological spectrum. While evidence supports exercise-therapy as a core treatment for PFP and PFOA, primary care physicians commonly prescribe medication, or refer for surgical consults in persistent cases. We conducted a systematic review of medical interventions (pharmaceutical, nutraceutical, and surgical) for PFP and PFOA to inform primary care decision making. METHODS:Following protocol registration, we searched seven databases for randomized clinical trials of our target interventions for PFP and PFOA. Our primary outcome was pain. We assessed risk of bias, calculated standardized mean differences (SMDs) and determined the level of evidence for each intervention. RESULTS:We included 14 publications investigating pharmaceutical or nutraceutical interventions, and eight publications investigating surgical interventions. Two randomized control trials (RCTs) provided moderate evidence of patellofemoral arthroplasty having similar pain outcomes compared to total knee arthroplasty in isolated PFOA, with SMDs ranging from -0.3 (95% CI -0.8, 0.2, Western Ontario McMaster Pain Subscale, 1 year post-surgery) to 0.3 (-0.1, 0.7, SF-36 Bodily Pain, 2 years post-surgery). Remaining studies provided, at most, limited evidence. No efficacy was demonstrated for oral nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories or arthroscopic surgery. CONCLUSIONS:Pharmaceutical and nutraceutical prescriptions, and surgical referrals are currently being made with little supporting evidence, with some interventions showing limited efficacy. This should be considered within the broader context of evidence supporting exercise-therapy as a core treatment for PFP and PFOA.

SUBMITTER: Macri EM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7690719 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Medical Interventions for Patellofemoral Pain and Patellofemoral Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.

Macri Erin M EM Hart Harvi F HF Thwaites David D Barton Christian J CJ Crossley Kay M KM Bierma-Zeinstra Sita M A SMA van Middelkoop Marienke M

Journal of clinical medicine 20201023 11

Patellofemoral pain (PFP) and patellofemoral osteoarthritis (PFOA) are common, persistent conditions that may lie along a pathological spectrum. While evidence supports exercise-therapy as a core treatment for PFP and PFOA, primary care physicians commonly prescribe medication, or refer for surgical consults in persistent cases. We conducted a systematic review of medical interventions (pharmaceutical, nutraceutical, and surgical) for PFP and PFOA to inform primary care decision making.<h4>Metho ...[more]

PMID: 33114034

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatellofemoral pain is highly prevalent across the lifespan, and a significant proportion of people report unfavourable outcomes years after diagnosis. Previous research has implicated patellofemoral joint loading during gait in patellofemoral pain and its sequelae, patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Biomechanical foot-based interventions (e.g., footwear, insoles, orthotics, taping or bracing) can alter patellofemoral joint loads by reducing motions at the foot that increase compression between the patella and underlying femur via coupling mechanisms, making them a promising treatment option. This systematic review will summarise the evidence about the effect of biomechanical foot-based interventions on patellofemoral joint loads during gait in adults with and without patellofemoral pain and osteoarthritis.MethodsMEDLINE (Ovid), the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature CINAHL, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), SPORTdiscus (EBSCO) and Embase (Ovid) will be searched. Our search strategy will include terms related to 'patellofemoral joint', 'loads' and 'biomechanical foot-based interventions'. We will include studies published in the English language that assess the effect of biomechanical foot-based interventions on patellofemoral joint loads, quantified by patellofemoral joint pressure, patellofemoral joint reaction force and/or knee flexion moment. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts, complete full-text reviews, and extract data from included studies. Two reviewers will assess study quality using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB 2) tool or the Cochrane Risk Of Bias In Non-Randomized Studies - of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. We will provide a synthesis of the included studies' characteristics and results. If three or more studies are sufficiently similar in population and intervention, we will pool the data to conduct a meta-analysis and report findings as standardised mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. If a meta-analysis cannot be performed, we will conduct a narrative synthesis of the results and produce forest plots for individual studies.DiscussionThis protocol outlines the methods of a systematic review that will determine the effect of biomechanical foot-based interventions on patellofemoral joint loads. Our findings will inform clinical practice by identifying biomechanical foot-based interventions that reduce or increase patellofemoral joint loads, which may aid the treatment of adults with patellofemoral pain and osteoarthritis.Trial registrationRegistered with PROSPERO on the 4th of May 2022 (CRD42022315207).

Project description:BackgroundIsolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis (PF-OA) is a common subtype of knee osteoarthritis, leading to a huge economic burden on health care systems. Although previous studies have shown that patellofemoral arthroplasty (PFA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) have good clinical effects, it remains largely unclear which treatment is more effective for patients with isolated PF-OA. We aimed to compare postoperative function, complications, revision rates, level of physical activity, and satisfaction rate between the two surgical techniques.MethodsOur study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Search of literature was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science until November 2020. The included studies were those that provided direct comparison of postoperative outcomes between PFA and TKA. Data were extracted from eligible studies and combined to calculate the pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Sensitivity analysis and subgroup analysis were conducted to evaluate heterogeneity between the two groups.ResultsA total of 7 eligible studies (3 recent randomized controlled trials and 4 nonrandomized controlled trials) were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled results showed that both the PFA group and the TKA group had improved postoperative indicators, suggesting that the two operation modes could improve the knee function and quality of life of patients. Throughout the first 2 years postoperatively, higher activity level, and better functional recovery were observed for PFA compared with TKA in this study; moreover, the differences between the two operation modes were statistically significant (p < 0.05). We found no significant difference in complications, revision rates, and satisfaction rate between the two procedures.ConclusionAlthough there was no observed difference in the complications, revision rates, and satisfaction rate between PFA and TKA, PFA was superior to TKA in terms of knee function and physical activity in the first 2 years postoperatively. Therefore, PFA is a safe, effective, and less invasive treatment for patients with isolated PF-OA. Our findings are consistent with the systematic review of current evidence that PFA may be more suitable for younger patients with high activity needs. Patient selection is, therefore, thought to be of paramount importance. Individualized surgical plan should be designed according to the patient's age, BMI, KOA site, and activity level and combined with the doctor's personal experience.

Project description:ContextTaping is commonly used in the management of several musculoskeletal conditions, including patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS). Specific guidelines for taping are unknown.ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy of knee taping in the management of PFPS. Our hypothesis was that tension taping and exercise would be superior to placebo taping and exercise as well as to exercise or taping alone.Data sourcesThe PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane, Rehabilitation and Sports Medicine Source, and CINAHL databases were reviewed for English-language randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of various taping techniques that were published between 1995 and April 2015. Keywords utilized included taping, McConnell, kinesio-taping, kinesiotaping, patellofemoral pain, and knee.Study selectionStudies included consisted of RCTs (level 1 or 2) with participants of all ages who had anterior knee or patellofemoral pain symptoms and had received nonsurgical management using any taping technique.Study designSystematic review.Level of evidenceLevel 2.Data extractionA checklist method was used to determine selection, performance, detection, and attrition bias for each article. A quality of evidence grading was then referenced using the validated PEDro database for RCTs. Three difference comparison groups were compared: tension taping and exercise versus placebo taping and exercise (group 1), placebo taping and exercise versus exercise alone (group 2), and tension taping and exercise versus taping alone (group 3).ResultsFive RCTs with 235 total patients with multiple intervention arms were included. Taping strategies included McConnell and Kinesiotaping. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores indicated improvement in all 3 comparison groups (group 1: 91 patients, 39% of total, mean VAS improvement 44.9 [tension taping + exercise] vs 66 [placebo taping + exercise]; group 2: 56 patients, 24% of total, mean VAS improvement 66 [placebo taping + exercise] vs 47.6 [exercise alone]; and group 3: 112 patients, 48% of total, mean VAS improvement 44.9 [tension taping + exercise] vs 14.1 [taping alone]).ConclusionThis systematic review supports knee taping only as an adjunct to traditional exercise therapy for PFPS; however, it does not support taping in isolation.

Project description:BackgroundOsteoarthritis and spinal pain are common and burdensome conditions; however, the majority of patients with these conditions do not receive care that is consistent with clinical practice guidelines. Telehealth models of care have the potential to improve care for osteoarthritis and spinal pain patients. The aim of this review was to assess the effectiveness of verbal real-time telehealth interventions, including telephone-based and videoconferencing interventions to reduce pain intensity and disability in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip and spinal pain (back or neck pain).MethodsWe searched seven electronic databases from inception to May 2018. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs, and non-randomised controlled trials were included. Two review authors independently extracted data for each included study. Primary outcomes were pain intensity and disability. We conducted primary meta-analyses combining all conditions with similar interventions and comparators. Standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random effects models. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool to assess risk of bias, and GRADE to evaluate the quality of evidence.ResultsWe included 23 studies with 56 trial arms and 4,994 participants. All studies utilised telephone-based interventions. Only two studies used a telephone only approach and the remainder included educational materials and/or face-to-face components. We found no studies utilising videoconferencing. Meta-analysis showed telephone-based interventions (with educational materials) for osteoarthritis and spinal pain improved pain intensity (n = 5 trials, n = 1,357 participants, SMD -0.27, 95% CI [-0.53, -0.01], Tau2 = 0.06, I 2 = 74%; moderate-quality evidence) and disability (n = 7 trials, n = 1,537 participants, SMD -0.21, 95% CI [-0.40, -0.02], Tau2 = 0.03, I 2 = 56%; moderate-quality evidence) compared to usual care. Meta-analyses found telephone with face-to-face interventions does not improve pain and disability compared to usual care or face-to-face care alone.DiscussionWe are moderately confident that telephone-based interventions reduce pain intensity and disability in patients with osteoarthritis and spinal pain compared to usual care, but telephone plus face-to-face interventions are no more effective than usual care or face-to-face interventions alone.

Project description:BackgroundPatellofemoral Pain Syndrome (PFPS), a common cause of anterior knee pain, is successfully treated in over 2/3 of patients through rehabilitation protocols designed to reduce pain and return function to the individual. Applying preventive medicine strategies, the majority of cases of PFPS may be avoided if a pre-diagnosis can be made by clinician or certified athletic trainer testing the current researched potential risk factors during a Preparticipation Screening Evaluation (PPSE). We provide a detailed and comprehensive review of the soft tissue, arterial system, and innervation to the patellofemoral joint in order to supply the clinician with the knowledge required to assess the anatomy and make recommendations to patients identified as potentially at risk. The purpose of this article is to review knee anatomy and the literature regarding potential risk factors associated with patellofemoral pain syndrome and prehabilitation strategies. A comprehensive review of knee anatomy will present the relationships of arterial collateralization, innervations, and soft tissue alignment to the possible multifactoral mechanism involved in PFPS, while attempting to advocate future use of different treatments aimed at non-soft tissue causes of PFPS.MethodsA systematic database search of English language PubMed, SportDiscus, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, LexisNexis, and EBM reviews, plus hand searching the reference lists of these retrieved articles was performed to determine possible risk factors for patellofemoral pain syndrome.ResultsPositive potential risk factors identified included: weakness in functional testing; gastrocnemius, hamstring, quadriceps or iliotibial band tightness; generalized ligamentous laxity; deficient hamstring or quadriceps strength; hip musculature weakness; an excessive quadriceps (Q) angle; patellar compression or tilting; and an abnormal VMO/VL reflex timing. An evidence-based medicine model was utilized to report evaluation criteria to determine the at-risk individuals, then a defined prehabilitation program was proposed that begins with a dynamic warm-up followed by stretches, power and multi-joint exercises, and culminates with isolation exercises. The prehabilitation program is performed at lower intensity level ranges and can be conducted 3 days per week in conjunction with general strength training. Based on an objective one repetition maximum (1RM) test which determines the amount an individual can lift in good form through a full range of motion, prehabilitation exercises are performed at 50-60% intensity.ConclusionTo reduce the likelihood of developing PFPS, any individual, especially those with positive potential risk factors, can perform the proposed prehabilitation program.

Dataset Information

Medical Interventions for Patellofemoral Pain and Patellofemoral Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.

Publications

Medical Interventions for Patellofemoral Pain and Patellofemoral Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets