↓ Skip to main content

Effects of rehabilitation approaches for runners with patellofemoral pain: protocol of a randomised clinical trial addressing specific underlying mechanisms

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
63 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
314 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effects of rehabilitation approaches for runners with patellofemoral pain: protocol of a randomised clinical trial addressing specific underlying mechanisms
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12891-015-0859-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-Francois Esculier, Laurent J. Bouyer, Blaise Dubois, Pierre Frémont, Lynne Moore, Jean-Sébastien Roy

Abstract

Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is highly prevalent in runners, and often leads to functional limitations and cessation of running. Training errors as well as decreased lower limb strength and control during running have all been associated with PFP. While strengthening and gait retraining are commonly used by clinicians, no randomised clinical trial has compared these modalities in runners with PFP. The primary objective of this randomised clinical trial will be to compare the effects of three rehabilitation programs targeting different key factors on symptoms and functional limitations of runners with PFP. The secondary objective will be to explore the factors leading to clinical improvement. We will conduct a single-blind randomised clinical trial to compare three different 8 week rehabilitation programs: Group 1 will receive education on symptoms management based on training modifications; Group 2 will receive an exercise program targeting lower limb strengthening and control in addition to the education component of Group 1; Group 3 will receive running gait retraining advice as well as the education component of Group 1. Sixty-nine runners with PFP will be recruited and will be seen by independent physiotherapists on five visits through 8 weeks. The primary outcome measure will be symptoms and functional limitations measured by the Knee Outcome Survey - Activities of Daily Living Scale questionnaire at baseline, and at the four, eight and 20 weeks follow-up. Secondary outcomes will include pain level measured using visual analog scales, and running mileage. Lower limb kinematics and kinetics during running, and isometric strength will also be evaluated at baseline and 8 weeks follow-up. The effects of rehabilitation programs on measures of symptoms and functional limitations will be assessed using a 2-way ANOVA (Groups x Time). Regression analyses will be used to identify if changes in running mechanics or strength are determinants of clinical success. Studies with a high level of evidence are needed to determine the best rehabilitation interventions for runners with PFP. This randomised clinical trial will be the first to compare programs targeting different key factors linked with PFP. Results may guide clinicians and improve their clinical outcomes when treating runners with PFP. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02352909 . Registered on December 3, 2014.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 63 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 314 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 311 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 52 17%
Student > Bachelor 47 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 7%
Researcher 19 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 15 5%
Other 48 15%
Unknown 112 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 68 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 53 17%
Sports and Recreations 35 11%
Social Sciences 6 2%
Unspecified 5 2%
Other 20 6%
Unknown 127 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 April 2022.
All research outputs
#1,076,902
of 25,758,211 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#154
of 4,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,376
of 402,277 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#5
of 74 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,758,211 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,443 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 402,277 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 74 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.