Live Feedback to Increase Adherence in Adolescents With Patellofemoral Pain

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Musculoskeletal Disorders; Joint Diseases; Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome
• Interventions: Other: No feedback on TUT; Other: Feedback on TUT; Other: Exercise

• Registration Number: NCT02674841
• Lead Sponsor: Aalborg University

Brief Summary

This study investigates if live feedback during home-based exercises will improve the ability to perform the exercises with the prescribed time under tension (TUT) per repetition compared with no feedback among adolescents with patellofemoral pain. The hypothesis is that adolescents who receive live feedback from BandCizer™ will have a mean TUT that is significantly closer to the prescribed TUT compared to the group not receiving feedback during the course of the intervention.

Detailed Description

Not available

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2016-02
• Study First Submitted: 2016-02-01
• Study First Submitted QC: 2016-02-04
• Study First Posted: 2016-02-05
• Primary Completion: 2016-10
• Study Completion: 2016-10
• Status Verified: 2016-11
• Last Update Submitted: 2016-11-16
• Last Update Posted: 2016-11-17

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 40

Inclusion Criteria

• 15 to 19 years of age
• Anterior knee pain of non-traumatic origin which is provoked by at least two of the following activities: prolonged sitting with bended knees or kneeling, squatting, running, jumping or ascending or descending stairs
• Tenderness on palpation of the peripatellar borders
• Pain of more than 6 weeks duration
• Worst pain during the previous week ≥ 30 mm on a 100 mm VAS

Exclusion Criteria

• Concomitant pain from other structures in the knee (e.g. ligament, tendon or cartilage), the hip or the lumbar spine
• Previous knee surgery
• Patellofemoral instability

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Control group	No feedback on TUT	Receives no feedback on TUT but on pulling force during exercises.
Control group	Exercise	Receives no feedback on TUT but on pulling force during exercises.
Feedback group	Exercise	Receives live feedback on TUT and pulling force during exercises.
Feedback group	Feedback on TUT	Receives live feedback on TUT and pulling force during exercises.

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Mean deviation from the prescribed TUT per repetition in seconds during the course of the intervention	From 0-6 weeks	The mean deviation is calculated as the difference between actual TUT and prescribed TUT (8 seconds). E.g. if the actual TUT is 6.5 seconds, the deviation is 1.5 seconds

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Pain measured on a 100 mm VAS	From 0-6 weeks	Is entered into the app by the adolescent before and after each exercise
Global rating of change	At the 6 week follow up	Self-reported recovery on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from "much improved" to "much worse"
Pulling force exerted per repetition measured in kilos	From 0-6 weeks	This will be expressed as the maximum pulling force during each repetition
Isometric strength	At baseline and at the 6 week follow up	Presented as Nm/kg in x, y and z direction
Kujala Patellofemoral Scale-score	At baseline and at the 6 week follow up	Gives a score on patellofemoral pain ranging from 0 to 100 with 0 as complete disability and 100 as fully functional
Summary of resistance	From 0-6 weeks	Total pulling force exerted during the course of the intervention measured in kilos
The total number of repetitions performed	From 0-6 weeks

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Aalborg Universitetshospital; 🇩🇰 Aalborg, The North Denmark Region, Denmark