Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Electromyography Cowan et al (2001) 33 PFPS and 33 Significant in PFPS population for EMG
(EMG) Measured asymptomatic controls onset of VL prior to VMO in both step up
Neuro-Motor [43] and step down phases of stair-stepping
Dysfunction Case-Control activity (P0.05).
Witvrouw et al (2000) 24 PFPS and 258 control Significant for faster response in VMO
subjects. (P=0.02) and VL (P=0.006) in the PFPS
[39] group compared to controls.
Prospective Cohort
Not significant for difference between
response of the VMO-VL (P=0.26) when
compared to controls.
Foot Abnormalities Duffey et al (2000) 99 anterior knee pain and Significant (P=0.05) for lower arch index
70 controls subjects. (cavus/ higher arches) for combined
[63] discriminant analysis only.
Case-Control
Thomee et al (1995) 40 PFPS and 20 control Not significant for lower leg anatomical
subjects. Leg-heel differences (no P value reported).
[47] alignment measurements
taken.
Case-Control
Witvrouw et al (2000) 24 PFPS and 258 control Not significant for genu varum/valgum
subjects. (P=0.96).
[39]
Prospective Cohort
Functional Testing Loudon et al (2002) 29 subjects with PFPS and PFPS subjects demonstrated decreased
11 controls. The 5 performance in anteromedial lunge, step-
[49] functional tests were down, single-leg press, balance and reach
anteromedial lunge, step- when compared to healthy controls
down, single-leg press, (P0.05). Intrarater interclass correlation
bilateral squat, balance coefficient: 0.79-0.94.
and reach.
Case-Control
Witvrouw et al (2000) 24 PFPS and 258 control Significant for a decreased vertical jump
subjects. Tested Flamingo (P=0.01) in PFPS subjects.
[39] balance, vertical jump,
standing broad jump, bent Not significant for a difference between
arm hang, shuttle run, PFPS and control subjects for Flamingo
plate tapping, arm pull, leg balance (P=0.021), standing broad jump
lifts, sit and reach, sit ups, (P=0.41), bent arm hang (P=0.6), shuttle
and maximal O2 uptake. run (P=0.8), plate tapping (P=0.79), arm
pull (P= 0.17), leg lifts (P=0.49), sit and
Prospective Cohort reach (P=0.25), sit ups (P=0.41), and
maximal oxygen uptake (P=0.96).
Gastrocnemius Duffey et al (2000) 99 anterior knee pain and Not significant (P0.05) for a difference
Tightness 70 control subjects. in anterior knee pain subjects compared
[63] to control subjects.
Case-Control
Piva et al (2005) 30 PFPS and 30 control Significant (P0.001) for both increased
subjects. gastrocnemius and soleus tightness in
[50] PFPS subjects.
Case-Control
Witvrouw et al (2000) 24 PFPS and 258 control Significant (P=0.038) for increased
subjects. gastrocnemius tightness.
[39]
Prospective Cohort
Generalized al-Rawi et al (1997) 115 chondromalacia Significant (P0.001) for increased joint
Ligamentous/Joint patellas and 110 control laxity in knees with chondromalacia
Laxity [64] subjects. compared to controls.
Case-Control
Fairbank et al (1984) 136 knee pain and 310 Not significant (no P value reported) for
control subjects. increased joint laxity in knee pain
[51] subjects.
Case-Control
Witvrouw et al (2000) 24 PFPS and 258 control Significant for increased thumb-forearm
subjects. mobility in PFPS subjects compared to
[39] controls (P=0.01).
Prospective Cohort
Not significant for increased extension of
the little forefinger (P=0.058), shoulder
mobility (P=0.06), elbow extension
(P=0.41), and knee extension (P=0.37) in
PFPS subjects compared to controls.
Hamstring Strength Kibler (1987) 76 running athletes with 81% of syndrome complex subjects
syndrome complex. had an absolute strength deficiency at
[59] 60deg per second and 73% had a
Case series deficiency at 240 degrees per second (No
P value reported)
Hamstring Tightness Kibler (1987) 76 running athletes with 23 % of syndrome complex subjects
syndrome complex. had tightness (no P value reported).
[59]
Case series
Piva et al (2005) 30 PFPS and 30 control Significant for hamstring tightness in the
subjects. PFPS subjects (P0.001).
[50]
Case-Control
Smith et al (1991) 14 anterior knee pain and Significant for hamstring tightness in the
32 control subjects. anterior knee pain subjects (P0.01).
[40]
Prospective Cohort
Witvrouw et al (2000) 24 PFPS and 258 control Not significant for hamstring tightness in
subjects. the PFPS subjects (P=0.442).
[39]
Prospective Cohort
Hip Musculature Cichanowski et al (2007) 13 PFPS and 13 matched Significant for hip abduction (P=0.003)
Weakness control subjects. PFPS and external rotation weakness (P=0.049)
[52] subjects were only when comparing injured to uninjured
included if unilateral pain. knee. Not significant for hip flexion
Injured leg was compared (P=0.466), extension (P=0.563),
to non-injured leg in PFPS adduction (P=0.650), and internal
group. rotation (P=0.111).
Ireland et al (2003) 15 PFPS and 15 control Significant for 26% less strength in hip
subjects. abductor in the PFPS subjects (P0.001).
[53]
Case-Control
Piva et al (2005) 30 PFPS and 30 control Not significant for hip external rotation
subjects. strength weakness (% of body mass)
[50] Case-Control (P=0.218) or hip abduction strength
weakness (% of body mass) (P=0.016).
Iliotibial Band Kibler (1987) 76 running athletes with 67% of syndrome complex subjects
Tightness syndrome complex. had IT band tightness (No P value
[59] reported).
Case series
Piva et al (2005) 30 PFPS and 30 control Not significant for iliotibial band/ tensor
subjects. fascia lata complex length (P=0.102)
[50] difference.
Case-Control
Winslow et al (1995) 14 PFPS and 34 control Significant for IT band tightness in PFPS
subjects. subjects(P0.01)
[54]
Case-Control
Quadriceps-Angle Aglietti et al (1983) 150 healthy knees and 90 Significant for increased Q angle in
chondromalacia patella chondromalacia patella knees (P0.001).
(Q-Angle) [55] knees.
Case-Control
Caylor et al (1993) 50 Anterior Knee Pain Not significant for difference in Q angle
subjects and 20 healthy in anterior knee pain compared to healthy
[56] subjects. control subjects (P=0.07).
Case-Control
Duffey et al (2000) 99 anterior knee pain and Not significant for difference in Q angle
70 controls. in anterior knee pain compared to healthy
[63] control subjects (P0.05).
Case-Control
Haim et al (2006) 61 PFPS and 25 control Significant for PFPS if the Q angle is
subjects. 32 PFPS had Q greater than 20 degrees (P0.001).
[48] angle greater than 20
degrees. No controls had
Q angle greater than 20
degrees.
Case-Control
Messier et al (1991) 16 PFPS and 20 controls. Significant for increased Q angle in PFPS
subjects between PFPS and control
[57] Case-Control subjects (P0.01).
Thomee et al (1995) 40 PFPS and 20 control Not significant for Q angle difference (P
subjects. not reported).
[47]
Case-Control
Witvrouw et al (2000) 24 PFPS and 258 control Not significant for Q angle difference
subjects. between PFPS and control subjects
[39] (P=0.394).
Prospective Cohort
Quadriceps Tightness Duffey et al (2000) 99 anterior knee pain and Significant for increased quadriceps
70 controls. tightness in anterior knee pain subjects
[63] (P=0.022).
Case-Control
Piva et al (2005) 30 PFPS and 30 control Significant for quadriceps tightness in the
subjects. PFPS subjects (P0.001).
[50]
Case-Control
Smith et al (1991) 14 anterior knee pain and Significant for quadriceps tightness in the
32 control subjects. PFPS subjects (P0.01).
[40]
Case-Control
Witvrouw et al (2000) 24 PFPS and 258 control Significant for quadriceps tightness in
subjects. PFPS subjects (P=0.028).
[39]
Prospective- Cohort
Quadriceps Weakness Bennett et al (1986) 130 anterior knee pain 41/130 subjects demonstrated decreased
subjects. torque production during eccentric
[62] exercise between 30-60 degrees of knee
Case series flexion (P0.05).
Messier et al (1991) 16 PFPS and 20 control Not significant for quadriceps weakness
subjects. in PFPS (P0.05).
[57]
Case-Control
Milgrom et al (1991) 77 PFPS knees of 390 Not significant for quadriceps weakness
military recruits. in PFPS (P0.05). Increased isometric
[41] strength of the quadriceps tested at 85
Prospective Cohort degrees of knee flexion was increased in
patellofemoral pain caused by
overactivity (P=0.05).
Haim et al (2006) 61 PFPS and 25 control Significant crepitations for PFPS subjects
subjects. 43 PFPS and 2 (P0.001).
[48] control subjects with PF
crepitations.
Case-Control
Patellar Mediolateral Haim et al (2006) 61 PFPS and 25 control Significant (P=0.018) reduced mobility in
Glide/Mobility subjects. Patellar glide PFPS patients.
[48] measured as a percentage
of patellar width.
Case-Control
Witvrouw et al (2000) 24 PFPS and 258 control Not significant (P=0.06), but medial,
subjects. lateral, and total patellar mobility was
[39] greater in PFPS group.
Prospective Cohort
Patellar Tilting Haim et al (2006) 61 PFPS and 25 control Significant (P=0.002) for lateral tilting.
subjects. Specificity 92% Sensitivity 43%
[48]
Case-Control