1 / 9

Kannus P, Nittymaki S. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1994; 26(3): 289-296.

Which factors predict outcome in the nonoperative treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome? A prospective follow-up study. Kannus P, Nittymaki S. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1994; 26(3): 289-296.

dewei
Download Presentation

Kannus P, Nittymaki S. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1994; 26(3): 289-296.

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Which factors predict outcome in the nonoperative treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome? A prospective follow-up study Kannus P, Nittymaki S. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 1994; 26(3): 289-296.

  2. Was a defined, representative sample of patients assembled at a common point in the course of their disease?---Y • 22 men, 27 women; 27± 9 y/o. • 17- competitive athlete; 32- recreational athlete • All have a characteristic history and symptom of the PFPS for one knee at least 2 months’ duration.

  3. Was patient follow-up sufficiently long and complete?---Y • Training for 6 weeks, the correct performance of the exercise was controlled at weekly follow-up. • No follow-up of any kind was done between the 6-wks evaluation and that at 6 months( the final outcome assessment).

  4. Were objective outcome criteria applied in a blind fashion?---Y • Visual Analog Scale( VAS ) • Lysholm knee scores • Tegner functional knee scores

  5. If subgroups with different prognosis are identified, was there adjustment for important prognostic factors?---N • All subjects served as a group and received the same treatment.

  6. Was there validation in an independent group of patients?---N • 49 patients visiting the clinic due to a characteristic unilateral PFPS during a 3-yr period were accepted in the analysis.

  7. How likely are the outcomes over time? • Change scores compared to baseline measures (6-wks). • 6-wk check point: age correlated to VAS (-0.41), Lysholm scores (-0.34), Tegner scores (-0.41). • 6-months check point: age correlated to lysholm scores (-0.27), Tegner scores (-0.41).

  8. How precise are the prognostic estimates? • Age accounted for less than 20% for the variation seen in the outcome variables, as determined by the r2-value of the age.

  9. Confidence interval around the measure of prognosis • n= 49, p= 70% • SE= √ 0.7 * 0.3 / 49= 0.065= 6.5% • 95% CI= 70% ± 1.96 * 6.5% 57.3% ~ 82.7% • PEDro

More Related