The Comprehensive Aachen Knee Score: Development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure for patellofemoral pathologies

Effect of adding hip exercises to general rehabilitation treatment of knee osteoarthritis on patients' physical functions: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Hip adductor and abductor strength were both reduced in KOA patients. But to date, most of the researches have only focused on quadriceps combined with hip abductor strengthening versus quadriceps strengthening.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to evaluate the effect of adding hip abductor and adductor strengthening to quadriceps strengthening on lower limb strength, knee pain and physical function in patients with medial compartmental knee osteoarthritis.

METHODS

In this study, 42 participants, were randomly divided into two groups: the general treatment group (GT group) and the added-hip-exercise group (AH group). All participants were given a general rehabilitation treatment. The AH group performed hip abductor and adductor strengthening in addition to the general rehabilitation treatment. Knee and hip muscle strength, Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test (FTSST), the Timed Up and Go Test (TUGT), Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores were assessed at baseline and 6 weeks. A two-sided 2-sample unpaired t test was performed to compare the difference in mean change scores between AH and GT groups.

RESULTS

Finally, 36 participants completed the study: both groups consist of 18 participants. In the per-protocol analysis, the AH group had a greater improvement in knee extension strength (mean changes, 7.84 versus 36.48; P < 0.001) and hip abduction strength (mean changes, 5.05 versus 26.62; P = 0.001) than the control group. Similarly, the AH group had a greater improvement in the FTSST time (mean changes, 0.40 s versus 3.57 s; P < 0.001) and the TUFT time (mean changes, 0.18 s versus 1.67 s; P = 0.002) than the GH group. No statistical difference was found in the change of WOMAC pain scores and NRS between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Older adults with knee OA in the AH group had superior muscle strength, symptoms and daily activity performance at the 6th week than those in the GT group. And adding hip exercises could expedite improvement of pain at the 2th week, but not at the 6th week.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial registration numbers and date of registration: ChiCTR-IOR-16009124, Registered 30 August 2016.

Patient-reported outcome measures for patellofemoral disorders: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Patellofemoral conditions include, but are not limited to, anterior knee pain syndrome and patellar instability. Patients and surgeons may find it difficult to identify the specific source of the symptoms and clinical scenarios, so patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) may be a useful diagnostic aid. There are a number of available PROMs for patellofemoral conditions, which are often used indistinctly. This systematic review explores the available PROMs for patellofemoral conditions, their use and methodological quality.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted, searching for scientific articles relating to PROMs in patellofemoral conditions, from inception to July 2022. Scoring systems including physician-directed or imagining assessment were not included. All types of conditions in the patellofemoral joint were considered.

RESULTS

Twenty-two relevant PROMs were encountered, divided into four categories: eight PROMs for anterior knee pain syndrome, five for patellar instability, four for other patellofemoral conditions and five for non-specific PROMs.

CONCLUSIONS

While many PROMs have been found used in patellofemoral research, only few of them have showed sufficient methodological quality. In addition, PROMs employed in PF literature are often inaccurately chosen. This review may help authors to better understand the characteristics of specific patellofemoral PROMs, in order to select the more appropriate and recommended ones.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.