Limits...
Foot orthoses and physiotherapy in the treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome: randomised clinical trial.

Collins N, Crossley K, Beller E, Darnell R, McPoil T, Vicenzino B - BMJ (2008)

Bottom Line: Foot orthoses produced improvement beyond that of flat inserts in the short term, notably at six weeks (relative risk reduction 0.66, 99% confidence interval 0.05 to 1.17; NNT 4 (99% confidence interval 2 to 51).All groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in primary outcomes over 52 weeks.Given the long term improvement observed in all treatment groups, general practitioners may seek to hasten recovery by prescribing prefabricated orthoses.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia 4072.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of foot orthoses in the management of patellofemoral pain syndrome with flat inserts or physiotherapy, and to investigate the effectiveness of foot orthoses plus physiotherapy.

Design: Prospective, single blind, randomised clinical trial.

Setting: Single centre trial within a community setting in Brisbane, Australia.

Participants: 179 participants (100 women) aged 18 to 40 years, with a clinical diagnosis of patellofemoral pain syndrome of greater than six weeks' duration, who had no previous treatment with foot orthoses or physiotherapy in the preceding 12 months.

Interventions: Six weeks of physiotherapist intervention with off the shelf foot orthoses, flat inserts, multimodal physiotherapy (patellofemoral joint mobilisation, patellar taping, quadriceps muscle retraining, and education), or foot orthoses plus physiotherapy.

Main outcome measures: Global improvement, severity of usual and worst pain over the preceding week, anterior knee pain scale, and functional index questionnaire measured at 6, 12, and 52 weeks.

Results: Foot orthoses produced improvement beyond that of flat inserts in the short term, notably at six weeks (relative risk reduction 0.66, 99% confidence interval 0.05 to 1.17; NNT 4 (99% confidence interval 2 to 51). No significant differences were found between foot orthoses and physiotherapy, or between physiotherapy and physiotherapy plus orthoses. All groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in primary outcomes over 52 weeks.

Conclusion: While foot orthoses are superior to flat inserts according to participants' overall perception, they are similar to physiotherapy and do not improve outcomes when added to physiotherapy in the short term management of patellofemoral pain. Given the long term improvement observed in all treatment groups, general practitioners may seek to hasten recovery by prescribing prefabricated orthoses.

Trial registration: Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012605000463673 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00118521.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Fig 2 Percentage of participants rating perceived improvement across categories from marked improvement to marked worsening
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2572211&req=5

fig2: Fig 2 Percentage of participants rating perceived improvement across categories from marked improvement to marked worsening

Mentions: Significant effects favoured foot orthoses over flat inserts at six weeks, with differences of 19.8 mm (99% confidence interval 4.0 to 35.6) on the continuous scale of global improvement, a number needed to treat of 4 (2 to 51) on the categorical scale (success equating marked and moderate improvement), and success rates of 85% (35/41) for foot orthoses and 58% (23/40) for flat inserts (fig 2, tables 2 and 3). These trends were mirrored when the categorical data on global improvement were collapsed to success equating marked improvement at six and 12 weeks. At six and 12 weeks no significant differences were found in global improvement between physiotherapy and foot orthoses, or between physiotherapy and combined physiotherapy and orthoses (tables 2 and 3). For each of the three a priori pairwise comparisons no significant differences were found between the groups on other outcome measures (table 3).


Foot orthoses and physiotherapy in the treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome: randomised clinical trial.

Collins N, Crossley K, Beller E, Darnell R, McPoil T, Vicenzino B - BMJ (2008)

Fig 2 Percentage of participants rating perceived improvement across categories from marked improvement to marked worsening
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC2572211&req=5

fig2: Fig 2 Percentage of participants rating perceived improvement across categories from marked improvement to marked worsening
Mentions: Significant effects favoured foot orthoses over flat inserts at six weeks, with differences of 19.8 mm (99% confidence interval 4.0 to 35.6) on the continuous scale of global improvement, a number needed to treat of 4 (2 to 51) on the categorical scale (success equating marked and moderate improvement), and success rates of 85% (35/41) for foot orthoses and 58% (23/40) for flat inserts (fig 2, tables 2 and 3). These trends were mirrored when the categorical data on global improvement were collapsed to success equating marked improvement at six and 12 weeks. At six and 12 weeks no significant differences were found in global improvement between physiotherapy and foot orthoses, or between physiotherapy and combined physiotherapy and orthoses (tables 2 and 3). For each of the three a priori pairwise comparisons no significant differences were found between the groups on other outcome measures (table 3).

Bottom Line: Foot orthoses produced improvement beyond that of flat inserts in the short term, notably at six weeks (relative risk reduction 0.66, 99% confidence interval 0.05 to 1.17; NNT 4 (99% confidence interval 2 to 51).All groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in primary outcomes over 52 weeks.Given the long term improvement observed in all treatment groups, general practitioners may seek to hasten recovery by prescribing prefabricated orthoses.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia 4072.

ABSTRACT

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of foot orthoses in the management of patellofemoral pain syndrome with flat inserts or physiotherapy, and to investigate the effectiveness of foot orthoses plus physiotherapy.

Design: Prospective, single blind, randomised clinical trial.

Setting: Single centre trial within a community setting in Brisbane, Australia.

Participants: 179 participants (100 women) aged 18 to 40 years, with a clinical diagnosis of patellofemoral pain syndrome of greater than six weeks' duration, who had no previous treatment with foot orthoses or physiotherapy in the preceding 12 months.

Interventions: Six weeks of physiotherapist intervention with off the shelf foot orthoses, flat inserts, multimodal physiotherapy (patellofemoral joint mobilisation, patellar taping, quadriceps muscle retraining, and education), or foot orthoses plus physiotherapy.

Main outcome measures: Global improvement, severity of usual and worst pain over the preceding week, anterior knee pain scale, and functional index questionnaire measured at 6, 12, and 52 weeks.

Results: Foot orthoses produced improvement beyond that of flat inserts in the short term, notably at six weeks (relative risk reduction 0.66, 99% confidence interval 0.05 to 1.17; NNT 4 (99% confidence interval 2 to 51). No significant differences were found between foot orthoses and physiotherapy, or between physiotherapy and physiotherapy plus orthoses. All groups showed clinically meaningful improvements in primary outcomes over 52 weeks.

Conclusion: While foot orthoses are superior to flat inserts according to participants' overall perception, they are similar to physiotherapy and do not improve outcomes when added to physiotherapy in the short term management of patellofemoral pain. Given the long term improvement observed in all treatment groups, general practitioners may seek to hasten recovery by prescribing prefabricated orthoses.

Trial registration: Australian Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN012605000463673 and ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00118521.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus