↓ Skip to main content

The effect of targeted treatment on people with patellofemoral pain: a pragmatic, randomised controlled feasibility study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (82nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
17 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
The effect of targeted treatment on people with patellofemoral pain: a pragmatic, randomised controlled feasibility study
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12891-017-1698-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Benjamin T. Drew, Philip G. Conaghan, Toby O. Smith, James Selfe, Anthony C. Redmond

Abstract

Targeted treatment, matched according to specific clinical criteria e.g. hip muscle weakness, may result in better outcomes for people with patellofemoral pain (PFP). However, to ensure the success of future trials, a number of questions on the feasibility of a targeted treatment need clarification. The aim of the study was to explore the feasibility of matched treatment (MT) compared to usual care (UC) management for a subgroup of people with PFP determined to have hip weakness and to explore the mechanism of effect for hip strengthening. In a pragmatic, randomised controlled feasibility study, 24 participants with PFP (58% female; mean age 29 years) were randomly allocated to receive either MT aimed specifically at hip strengthening, or UC over an eight-week period. The primary outcomes were feasibility outcomes, which included rates of adherence, attrition, eligibility, missing data and treatment efficacy. Secondary outcomes focused on the mechanistic outcomes of the intervention, which included hip kinematics. Conversion to consent (100%), missing data (0%), attrition rate (8%) and adherence to both treatment and appointments (>90%) were deemed successful endpoints. The analysis of treatment efficacy showed that the MT group reported a greater improvement for the Global Rating of Change Scale (62% vs. 9%) and the Anterior Knee Pain Scale (-5.23 vs. 1.18) but no between-group differences for either average or worst pain. Mechanistic outcomes showed a greatest reduction in peak hip internal rotation angle for the MT group (13.1% vs. -2.7%). This feasibility study indicates that a definitive randomised controlled trial investigating a targeted treatment approach is achievable. Findings suggest the mechanism of effect of hip strengthening may be to influence kinematic changes in hip function in the transverse plane. This study was registered retrospectively. ISRCTN74560952 . Registration date: 2017-02-06.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 17 29%
Unspecified 11 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 17%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Researcher 4 7%
Other 12 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 36%
Unspecified 16 28%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 22%
Sports and Recreations 4 7%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 3 5%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 02 September 2017.
All research outputs
#1,162,997
of 11,691,744 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#286
of 2,374 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,883
of 267,416 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#8
of 46 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,691,744 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,374 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 267,416 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 46 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.