Do exercises for patellofemoral pain reflect common injury mechanisms? A systematic review

Effectiveness of Interventions Aimed at Changing Movement Patterns in People With Patellofemoral Pain: A Systematic Review With Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the effectiveness of interventions for changing movement during weight-bearing functional tasks in people with patellofemoral pain (PFP). DESIGN: Systematic review with network meta-analysis (NMA). LITERATURE SEARCH: Medline, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception up to May 2023. STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials involving people with PFP and nonsurgical, nonpharmacological interventions on task kinematics were included. DATA SYNTHESIS: NMA was conducted for frontal knee movement data, and pairwise meta-analysis was used to pool data when NMA was not possible. Reduced movements were those changes that indicated movements occurring with less amplitude. The GRADE approach was used to grade the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: Thirty-seven trials were included (n = 1235 participants). Combining knee/hip exercises with internal feedback had the strongest effect on reducing frontal knee movements (standardized mean difference [SMD] from NMA = -2.66; GRADE: moderate evidence). On pairwise comparisons, the same combination of interventions reduced frontal hip movements (SMD = -0.47; GRADE: moderate evidence) and increased sagittal knee movements (SMD = 1.03; GRADE: moderate evidence), with no effects on sagittal hip movements (GRADE: very low evidence), compared to knee/hip exercises alone. There was no effect for single applications of braces on the frontal knee movement (GRADE: very low evidence) and taping on movements of the knee, hip, and ankle (GRADE: very low to low evidence) compared to no intervention. CONCLUSION: Knee/hip exercises combined with internal feedback techniques may change knee and hip movements in people with PFP. The combination of these interventions can reduce frontal knee and hip movements, and can increase sagittal knee movements. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(12):1-13. Epub 14 September 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11956.

Correlation Between Severity of Symptoms and Quality of Life in Patellofemoral Pain Syndromes: A Cross-Sectional Study

Background Patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) is one of the conditions frequently encountered by musculoskeletal physiotherapists. The intensity and severity of pain and symptoms seen in PFPS affect the quality of life (QOL). This concept has not yet been investigated with the use of reliable and valid scales. Hence, the objective of this study is to find out the correlation between the severity of symptoms and QOL in patients with PFPS. Methodology In this cross-sectional study, 63 patients with PFPS, aged between 40 and 60 years, who visited Sir Sayajirao General Hospital, Vadodara, from December 2018 to June 2019, were included. The questionnaires included in the study comprised the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), the Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey-Patellofemoral Subscale (KOOS-PF), and the Short Form-36 (SF-36). Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was used to find the correlation. Results NPRS was found to have a fairly positive correlation with the functional scale KOOS-PF, with a P-value of 0.008. Among the eight components of SF-36, Physical Function and General Health scores exhibited a fairly positive correlation with NPRS, with p-values of 0.016 and <0.001, respectively. However, no correlation was observed between NPRS and the other components of SF-36. Conclusions This study concluded that patients with PFPS with different levels of pain exhibit different functional and QOL limitations. Furthermore, studies investigating the causes of the negative correlation should be conducted to have a better understanding of QOL in PFPS.

Patellofemoral Joint Loading Progression Across 35 Weightbearing Rehabilitation Exercises and Activities of Daily Living

BACKGROUND

Exercises that provide progressive therapeutic loading are a central component of patellofemoral pain rehabilitation, but quantitative evidence on patellofemoral joint loading is scarce for a majority of common weightbearing rehabilitation exercises.

PURPOSE

To define a loading index to quantify, compare, rank, and categorize overall loading levels in the patellofemoral joint across 35 types of weightbearing rehabilitation exercises and activities of daily living.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive laboratory study.

METHODS

Model-estimated knee flexion angles and extension moments based on motion capture and ground-reaction force data were used to quantify patellofemoral joint loading in 20 healthy participants who performed each exercise. A loading index was computed via a weighted sum of loading peak and cumulative loading impulse for each exercise. The 35 rehabilitation exercises and daily living activities were then ranked and categorized into low, moderate, and high "loading tiers" according to the loading index.

RESULTS

Overall patellofemoral loading levels varied substantially across the exercises and activities, with loading peak ranging from 0.6 times body weight during walking to 8.2 times body weight during single-leg decline squat. Most rehabilitation exercises generated a moderate level of patellofemoral joint loading. Few weightbearing exercises provided low-level loading that resembled walking or high-level loading with both high magnitude and duration. Exercises with high knee flexion tended to generate higher patellofemoral joint loading compared with high-intensity exercises.

CONCLUSION

This study quantified patellofemoral joint loading across a large collection of weightbearing exercises in the same cohort.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The visualized loading index ranks and modifiable worksheet may assist clinicians in planning patient-specific exercise programs for patellofemoral pain rehabilitation.

Rehabilitation strategies for lateral ankle sprain do not reflect established mechanisms of re-injury: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

1) determine the primary impairment addressed by each exercise included in exercise-based rehabilitation programs for patients with an acute ankle sprain; 2) Determine whether prescribed exercises incorporate complex tasks associated with ankle sprain injury mechanisms?

METHODS

We searched databases CINAHL, Web of Science, SPORTDiscus, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, PEDro, Google Scholar for RCT's including patients with acute ankle sprains, managed through exercise-based rehabilitation. Risk of bias was assessed by the Risk of Bias 2 tool. Exercises were analysed based on: the primary impairment(s) addressed; direction of movement; base of support; weightbearing status; flight phase. (PROSPERO: CRD42020210858) RESULTS: We included fourteen RCT's comprising 177 exercises. Neuromuscular function was addressed in 44% of exercises, followed by performance tasks (23%), and muscle strengthening (20%). Exercises were limited to movements across the sagittal plane (48%), with 31% incorporating multiplanar movements. Weight bearing exercises were almost divided equally between single-limb (59/122) and double leg stance exercises (61/122). Eighteen percent of all exercises incorporated a flight phase.

CONCLUSIONS

Rehabilitation after LAS comprises simple exercises in the sagittal plane that do not reflect mechanisms of re-injury. Future interventions should incorporate more open chain joint position sense training, multiplanar single limb challenges, and jumping and landing exercises.

The effect of a supervised online group exercise program on symptoms associated with patellofemoral pain syndrome in women

BACKGROUND

Patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) is one of the musculoskeletal system pathologies frequently encountered especially in women.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the current study was to compare the efficacy of an online exercise program with a home exercise program including the same exercises, and a control group planned for females with PFPS.

METHODS

The study included 60 females with PFPS aged 33.17 ± 6.84. Participants were randomly divided into 3 groups. One of the groups was given a 6-week home program consisting of evidence-based exercises. Exercises consisting of the same exercises were supervised online to another group. The third group did not receive any intervention. Pain, knee joint range of motion, muscle strength in flexion and extension and hip posterolateral muscle group, patellofemoral joint functionality, quality of life, recurrence of injury and fear of movement were measured at preintervention and postintervention.

RESULTS

Participation in the online supervised exercise group was seen to result in a greater decrease in pain during activity and kinesiophobia, and a greater increase in the quality of life mental health sub-dimension compared to the home exercise group.

CONCLUSION

Online supervised exercise groups could be an alternative telerehabilitation method for exercise programs established for women with PFPS.

Is Postural Control Affected in People with Patellofemoral Pain and Should it be Part of Rehabilitation? A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Growing evidence supports that exercise therapy is effective for patellofemoral pain (PFP) rehabilitation. Nevertheless, the improvements have been reported not to be sustained in the long term, suggesting that the current protocols may not comprehend all required functional factors to provide a consistent recovery. A potential neglected factor in treatment protocols for PFP is postural control. However, it is unclear whether this population presents balance impairments or the influence of postural control on pain and function during rehabilitation programmes.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether (Q1) balance is impaired in people with PFP compared to controls, (Q2) conservative interventions are effective to improve balance in people with PFP, and (Q3) balance exercises are effective to improve pain and function in people with PFP.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Web of Science and Cochrane Library, supplemented by hand searching of reference lists, citations and relevant systematic reviews in the field.

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted according to the Cochrane recommendations and reported according to the PRISMA statement recommendations. We included cross-sectional studies comparing balance between people with and without PFP; and randomised controlled trials verifying the effect of conservative intervention on balance and the effect of balance intervention on pain and function in people with PFP. The risk of bias was assessed using the Epidemiological Appraisal Instrument for cross-sectional studies and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale for randomised controlled trials.

RESULTS

From 15,436 records, 57 studies (Q1 = 28, Q2 = 23, Q3 = 14) met the eligibility criteria. Meta-analyses indicated that people with PFP have worse anteroposterior (very low grade evidence, standardised mean difference [SMD] = 1.03, 95% CI 0.40-1.66) and mediolateral (moderate grade evidence, SMD = 0.87, 95% CI 0.31-1.42) balance compared to controls. Moderate grade evidence indicated that overall balance is not affected in people with PFP (SMD = 0.38, 95% CI - 0.05-0.82). Low to very low grade evidence indicates that interventions are ineffective for mediolateral (SMD = 0.01, 95% CI - 0.51-0.53) and overall (SMD = 0.49, 95% CI - 0.14-1.11) balance improvements, and low grade evidence indicates that interventions are effective to improve anteroposterior balance (SMD = 0.64, 95% CI 0.04-1.23). Moderate to low grade evidence indicated that balance interventions are effective to reduce pain (SMD = 0.82, 95% CI 0.26-1.38) and improve function (SMD = 0.44, 95% CI 0.09-0.80) when measured using questionnaires; and very low grade evidence indicated no efficacy for function measured via functional tests (SMD = 0.73, 95% CI - 0.16-1.61).

CONCLUSION

People with PFP likely present balance deficits compared to asymptomatic people. There was insufficient evidence to support the efficacy of interventions to improve or modify balance in people with PFP. Also, there was insufficient evidence to support the efficacy of balance exercises to improve pain and function in people with PFP. Trial Registration The present systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018091717).

If exercise is medicine, why don't we know the dose? An overview of systematic reviews assessing reporting quality of exercise interventions in health and disease

OBJECTIVE

To determine how well exercise interventions are reported in trials in health and disease.

DESIGN

Overview of systematic reviews.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus and PsycINFO from inception until June 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Reviews of any health condition were included if they primarily assessed quality of exercise intervention reporting using the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) or the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR). We assessed review quality using a modified version of A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews.

RESULTS

We identified 7804 studies and included 28 systematic reviews. The median (IQR) percentage of CERT and TIDieR items appropriately reported was 24% (19%) and 49% (33%), respectively. TIDieR items 1, Brief name (median=100%, IQR 4) and 2, Why (median=98%, IQR 6), as well as CERT item 4, Supervision and delivery (median=68%, IQR 89), were the best reported. For replication of exercise interventions, TIDieR item 8, When and how much, was moderately well reported (median=62%, IQR 68) although CERT item 8, Description of each exercise to enable replication (median=23%, IQR 44) and item 13, Detailed description of the exercise intervention (median=24%, IQR 66) were poorly reported. Quality of systematic reviews ranged from moderate to critically low quality.

CONCLUSION

Exercise interventions are poorly reported across a range of health conditions. If exercise is medicine, then how it is prescribed and delivered is unclear, potentially limiting its translation from research to practice.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021261285; Open Science Framework: osf.io/my3ec/.