Dataset Information

Effectiveness of local exercise therapy versus spinal manual therapy in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome: medium term follow-up results of a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Increasing evidence has shown benefits of spinal manipulations in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS). There is scarcity regarding medium term effects of spinal manual therapy on outcome measures in PFPS patients. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of local exercise therapy and spinal manual therapy for knee pain, function and maximum voluntary peak force (MVPF) velocity of the quadriceps in PFPS patients.

Methods

Forty-three patients with PFPS were randomly assigned to a local exercise or spinal manual therapy group. The local exercise group received six sessions (one session per week) of supervised training of the knee-and hip muscles with mobilization of the patellofemoral joint. The spinal manual therapy group received six interventions (one intervention per week) of high velocity low thrust manipulations at the thoracolumbar region, sacroiliac joint, and/or hip. All patients were also asked to do home exercises. Maximum, minimum and current pain were measured using the visual analogue scale. Function was assessed with the anterior knee pain scale (AKPS) and MPFV was recorded using a Biodex System 3 dynamometer. Patients were assessed before intervention, after 6 weeks of intervention and after 6 weeks of follow-up. Between-group differences at assessments were analysed by way of analysis of covariance with Bonferroni correction.

Results

Pain and functionality improved more following spinal manipulative therapy than local exercise therapy. After 6 weeks of intervention the between-group difference (local versus spinal) for maximal pain was 23.4 mm [95% CI: 9.3, 37.6; effect size (ES): 1.04] and - 12.4 [95% CI: - 20.2, - 4.7; ES: 1.00] for the AKPS. At 6 weeks of follow-up the between-group difference for maximal pain was 18.7 mm [95% CI: 1.4, 36.0; ES: 0.68] and - 11.5 [95% CI: - 19.9, - 3.3; ES: - 0.87] for the AKPS.

Conclusions

This study suggests that spinal manual therapy is more effective than local exercise therapy in improving pain and function in patients with PFPS in the medium term. We suggest for future research to investigate whether combining local exercise therapy and spinal manual therapy is more effective than either single intervention on its own. This clinical trial study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee METC Z under registration number NL57207.096. and registered retrospectively in ClinicalTrials.gov PRS with registration ID number NCT04748692 on the 10th of February 2021.

SUBMITTER: Scafoglieri A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8126114 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn a previous randomised controlled trial we showed that acupuncture with a combination of manual- and electrical stimulation (EA) did not affect the level of pain, as compared with acupuncture with manual stimulation (MA) and standard care (SC), but reduced the need for other forms of pain relief, including epidural analgesia. To dismiss an under-treatment of pain in the trial, we did a long-term follow up on the recollection of labour pain and the birth experience comparing acupuncture with manual stimulation, acupuncture with combined electrical and manual stimulation with standard care. Our hypothesis was that despite the lower frequency of use of other pain relief, women who had received EA would make similar retrospective assessments of labour pain and the birth experience 2 months after birth as women who received standard care (SC) or acupuncture with manual stimulation (MA).MethodsSecondary analyses of data collected for a randomised controlled trial conducted at two delivery wards in Sweden. A total of 303 nulliparous women with normal pregnancies were randomised to: 40 min of MA or EA, or SC without acupuncture. Questionnaires were administered the day after partus and 2 months later.ResultsTwo months postpartum, the mean recalled pain on the visual analogue scale (SC: 70.1, MA: 69.3 and EA: 68.7) did not differ between the groups (SC vs MA: adjusted mean difference 0.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] -6.3 to 7.9 and SC vs EA: mean difference 1.3 CI 95% -5.5 to 8.1). Positive birth experience (SC: 54.3%, MA: 64.6% and EA: 61.0%) did not differ between the groups (SC vs MA: adjusted Odds Ratio [OR] 1.8, CI 95% 0.9 to 3.7 and SC vs EA: OR 1.4 CI 95% 0.7 to 2.6).ConclusionsDespite the lower use of other pain relief, women who received acupuncture with the combination of manual and electrical stimulation during labour made the same retrospective assessments of labour pain and birth experience 2 months postpartum as those who received acupuncture with manual stimulation or standard care.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01197950.

Project description:ContextRehabilitative exercises alleviate pain in patients with patellofemoral pain (PFP); however, no researchers have analyzed the cartilage response after a bout of those athletic activities in patients with PFP.ObjectiveTo determine if a single session of rehabilitative exercises alters femoral cartilage morphology.DesignCrossover study.SettingResearch laboratory.Patients or other participantsTwelve participants with PFP (age = 21.0 ± 2.0 years, height = 1.72 ± 0.1 m, mass = 68.7 ± 12.6 kg) and 12 matched healthy participants (age = 21.3 ± 2.8 years, height = 1.71 ± 0.1 m, mass = 65.9 ± 12.2 kg) were enrolled.Intervention(s)Participants completed treadmill running, lower extremity strengthening exercises, and plyometric exercises for 30 minutes each.Main outcome measure(s)Patient-reported outcomes on the visual analog scale, Anterior Knee Pain Scale (AKPS), Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain and Osteoarthritis were collected. Femoral cartilage ultrasonographic images were obtained at 140° of knee flexion. Ultrasound images were segmented into medial and lateral images using the intercondylar notch. Medial and lateral cartilage cross-sectional area (mm2) and echo intensity (EI), defined as the average grayscale from 0 to 255, were analyzed by ImageJ software. The difference between loading conditions was calculated using repeated-measures analysis of variance. The Spearman correlation was calculated to find the association between the cartilage percentage change (Δ%) and patient-reported outcomes.ResultsPain increased in the PFP group after all loading conditions (P values < .007). No differences were found in cartilage cross-sectional area or EI alteration between or within groups (P values > .06). The KOOS was negatively associated with the Δ% of the lateral femoral cartilage EI after plyometric loading (ρ = -0.87, P = .001), and the AKPS score was positively correlated with the Δ% of lateral femoral cartilage EI (ρ = 0.57, P = .05).ConclusionsUltrasound imaging did not identify cartilaginous deformation after all loading conditions. However, because lateral cartilaginous EI changes were associated with the AKPS and KOOS score, those questionnaires may be useful for monitoring changes in femoral cartilage health.

Project description:BACKGROUND CONTEXT:Chronic neck pain is a prevalent and disabling condition among older adults. Despite the large burden of neck pain, little is known regarding the cost-effectiveness of commonly used treatments. PURPOSE:This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of home exercise and advice (HEA), spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) plus HEA, and supervised rehabilitative exercise (SRE) plus HEA. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING:Cost-effectiveness analysis conducted alongside a randomized clinical trial (RCT) was performed. PATIENT SAMPLE:A total of 241 older adults (?65 years) with chronic mechanical neck pain comprised the patient sample. OUTCOME MEASURES:The outcome measures were direct and indirect costs, neck pain, neck disability, SF-6D-derived quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) over a 1-year time horizon. METHODS:This work was supported by grants from the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (#F32AT007507), National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (#P60AR062799), and Health Resources and Services Administration (#R18HP01425). The RCT is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (#NCT00269308). A societal perspective was adopted for the primary analysis. A healthcare perspective was adopted as a sensitivity analysis. Cost-effectivenesswas a secondary aim of the RCT which was not powered for differences in costs or QALYs. Differences in costs and clinical outcomes were estimated using generalized estimating equations and linear mixed models, respectively. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves were calculated to assess the uncertainty surrounding cost-effectiveness estimates. RESULTS:Total costs for SMT+HEA were 5% lower than HEA (mean difference: -$111; 95% confidence interval [CI] -$1,354 to $899) and 47% lower than SRE+HEA (mean difference: -$1,932; 95% CI -$2,796 to -$1,097). SMT+HEA also resulted in a greater reduction of neck pain over the year relative to HEA (0.57; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.92) and SRE+HEA (0.41; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.76). Differences in disability and QALYs favored SMT+HEA. The probability that adding SMT to HEA is cost-effective at willingness to pay thresholds of $50,000 to $200,000 per QALY gained ranges from 0.75 to 0.81. If adopting a health-care perspective, costs for SMT+HEA were 66% higher than HEA (mean difference: $515; 95% CI $225 to $1,094), resulting in an ICER of $55,975 per QALY gained. CONCLUSION:On average, SMT+HEA resulted in better clinical outcomes and lower total societal costs relative to SRE+HEA and HEA alone, with a 0.75 to 0.81 probability of cost-effectiveness for willingness to pay thresholds of $50,000 to $200,000 per QALY.

Project description:BackgroundA central element in the current debate about best practice management of non-specific low back pain (NSLBP) is the efficacy of targeted versus generic (non-targeted) treatment. Many clinicians and researchers believe that tailoring treatment to NSLBP subgroups positively impacts on patient outcomes. Despite this, there are no systematic reviews comparing the efficacy of targeted versus non-targeted manual therapy and/or exercise. This systematic review was undertaken in order to determine the efficacy of such targeted treatment in adults with NSLBP.MethodMEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents, AMED and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were electronically searched, reference lists were examined and citation tracking performed. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials of targeted manual therapy and/or exercise for NSLPB that used trial designs capable of providing robust information on targeted treatment (treatment effect modification) for the outcomes of activity limitation and pain. Included trials needed to be hypothesis-testing studies published in English, Danish or Norwegian. Method quality was assessed using the criteria recommended by the Cochrane Back Review Group.ResultsFour high-quality randomized controlled trials of targeted manual therapy and/or exercise for NSLBP met the inclusion criteria. One study showed statistically significant effects for short-term outcomes using McKenzie directional preference-based exercise. Research into subgroups requires much larger sample sizes than traditional two-group trials and other included studies showed effects that might be clinically important in size but were not statistically significant with their samples sizes.ConclusionsThe clinical implications of these results are that they provide very cautious evidence supporting the notion that treatment targeted to subgroups of patients with NSLBP may improve patient outcomes. The results of the studies included in this review are too patchy, inconsistent and the samples investigated are too small for any recommendation of any treatment in routine clinical practice to be based on these findings. The research shows that adequately powered controlled trials using designs capable of providing robust information on treatment effect modification are uncommon. Considering how central the notion of targeted treatment is to manual therapy principles, further studies using this research method should be a priority for the clinical and research communities.