CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT04011436Updated Nov 23, 2021Results posted

Therapeutic Effect of Two Muscle Strengthening Programs in Patients With Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome

An interventional study of Strengthening program in Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome, sponsored by Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Completed at 1 site in Colombia. Open to participants aged 15 Years to 40 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-11-23.

Sponsored by Universidad Nacional de Colombia · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 10 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Aug 2018, registered Jun 2019).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
40
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
15 Years to 40 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Introduction: The patellofemoral pain syndrome (SPF) is one of the most frequent pathologies generated by the knee joint. Conservative treatment with physiotherapy exercises reduces pain and improves functional capacity in the short and medium term. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic effect of combining a program of muscle strengthening exercises for the core, hip and knee on anterior knee pain in non-athletic patients with SPF. Materials and methods: Randomized controlled trial clinical trial, designed to evaluate the effect of two muscle strengthening programs in people with SPF (Group A: exercises for core, hip and knee, Group B: exercises for hip and knee), during eight weeks of intervention in people between 15 and 40 years of age, with a clinical diagnosis of SPF, with a level of mild to moderate physical activity. The Kujala test was used to measure pain and quality of life.

Read the detailed description

Experimental study: controlled clinical trial, designed to evaluate the effect of two muscle strengthening programs in people with patellofemoral pain syndrome.

Young adults between 15 and 40 years old, with clinical diagnosis of patellofemoral pain syndrome (by means of Computerized Axial Tomography and medical concept of a specialist Orthopedist in knee), in the last three years, non-athletes with a level of physical activity between mild and moderate, affiliated to the health care institution CAFAM (Caja de Compensación Familiar is a compensation fund of Colombia that has pharmacies, hotels, Convention Center, Recreation Club, School, among others and offers Subsidy Services, Credits, Insurance, Tourism, Health, Education, Housing).

All the procedures developed within the study had as a reference the standards of good clinical practice and ethical principles for medical research in humans. The participants signed the informed consent where they accepted their participation in the present study.

The participants were randomized with the SNOSE (sequentially numbered, opaque sealed envelopes) method to two protocols of muscular strengthening (Group A: Exercises for core, hip and knee and Group B: Exercises for Hip and Knee).

02

Conditions studied

  • Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome

Keywords

  • anterior knee pain
  • patellofemoral pain syndrome AND treatment
  • patellofemoral pain AND diagnosis
  • patellofemoral pain syndrome AND exercise
  • patellofemoral pain AND physiotherapy
03

In context

Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome

295 studies on the registry are indexed under Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome; 75 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 40 is below the median of 45 across 242 interventional studies indexed under Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome.

Browse Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome studies →

Lead sponsor

Universidad Nacional de Colombia is the lead sponsor of 38 studies on the registry; 5 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
15 Years to 40 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients with a clinical diagnosis of patellofemoral misalignment with knee CT, aged between 15 and 40 years.
  • Patients with clinical signs of retropatellar pain at rest or in the following activities: going up or down stairs, jumping, running, doing squats, kneeling, or sitting for a long time.
  • Pain or apprehension to the mobilization of the patella.
  • Crepitus with pain when performing squats.
  • Confirmatory CT of unilateral or bilateral patellofemoral misalignment.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Clinical history or clinical evidence of patellofemoral dislocation, subluxation or osteoarthrosis of the knees.
  • Dysfunction of the ligaments, bursa, meniscus, patellar tendon or synovial plica of the knee.
  • Traumatic lesions of ligaments or meniscus or patients with osteoarthrosis secondary to congenital conditions.
  • Clinical history of orthopedic surgery in lower limbs.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
40 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Core, Hip and knee.

    Physical Exercises to strengthen the core, hip and knee.

    Other: Strengthening program

  • Sham comparator
    Hip and Knee

    Physical Exercises to strengthen the hip and knee.

    Other: Strengthening program

Interventions

  • OtherStrengthening program

    Both protocols lasted eight (8) weeks, the anatomical conditioning phase was carried out in two weeks of intervention, followed by 4 weeks of strengthening or strength increase and two additional weeks as a final or maintenance phase, at the end of which performed the final evaluations to identify if there were differences in the groups after the physiotherapeutic intervention. Group A: 28 exercises Group B: 24 exercises

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Assessment of Change in Pain and Function Before and After Treatment With Kujala´s Test: Presented as Percentages and 95% Confidence Interval.

    The Kujala patellofemoral pain scale, is an assessment tool developed to assesses pain and function in patients with disorders of the patellofemoral joint and consists of 13 questions, each with three to five response options, scored from 0 to 5, or 0 to 10, depending on the question. The lowest possible total value is 0 and corresponds to patients who are in a worse functional health condition. The highest possible total value is 100, for those that do not have any alteration and are in optimal condition. The results below, are presented as percentages and 95% confidence interval.

    Time frame: The next table shows the distribution of the 13 domains of the Kujala´Test by intervention group at baseline (Time point 1, one day before intervention). "Assessed at baseline and after treatment, only baseline pre-specified to be reported".

  2. Assessment of Change in Pain With Visual Analogue Scale

    Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) is a numeric scale from 0 to 10 to measure pain (been 0 no pain and 10 worse pain).

    Time frame: The pain assessment will be done at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Change in Patellofemoral Misalignment With Q Angle´s Exam

    We measured the Q angle (degrees) between the border of the anterosuperior iliac spine, the center of the patella and the center of the tibia. the data result, shows the median values, and the interquartile range (IR) with a Delta change between measure number 1 and number 2.

    Time frame: The Q angle assessment will be done at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention).

  2. Change in Core Strength With McGill´s Exam

    The protocol consists of 3 tests that measure all aspects of torso strength via isometric muscle endurance 1.Trunk flexor test, 2.Trunk extensor test 3. Lateral musculature test (rigth and left side). t is a timed test involving a static, isometric contraction, until the individual exhibits fatigue and can no longer hold the assumed position. The goal of the test is to hold each position for as long as possible.

    Time frame: The Core strength assessment will be done at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention)

  3. Change in Quadriceps and Gluteus Strength With Squat´s Test

    Squat Test is a field test, easy and simple to assess the Gluteus and quadriceps muscles strength.

    Time frame: Quadriceps and gluteus Strength assessment will be done at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention)

  4. Change in Static Balance With Single Leg Stance

    This test is used to evaluate the control of postural and static balance with the eyes open and closed in seconds. (if the participant does not complete the 45 seconds framework is thought to be lacking of equilibrium).

    Time frame: Static Balance assesment will be done at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention)

  5. Change in the Total Amount (Work, Transport, Home and Recreation) of Physical Activity Reported in Minutes and Measured With The International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Long Form

    The amount of physical activity places patients in 1 to 3 categories: 1. Low/inactive: do not meet criteria for categories 2 or 3. 2. Moderate: meet 1 the following: a. 3 or more days with at least 20 minutes of vigorous activity b. 5 or more days with at least 30 minutes of moderate-intensity activity or walking. c. 5 or more days with any combination of walking, moderate-intensity, or vigorous intensity activities with at least 600 MET-min/week. 3. High: meet 1 of the following: a. 3 or more days of vigorous-intensity activity and at least 1500 MET-min/week. b. 7 days of any combination of walking moderate-intensity, or vigorous intensity activities with at least 3000 MET-min/week. We decided to add the time in minutes for each category of the IPAQ (work, transport, home and recreation), to obtain a more objective calculation, and to be able to make comparisons between the two different time points.

    Time frame: Physical Activity will be measured at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention)

07

Results

Posted Nov 23, 2021

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneCore, Hip and Knee.Hip and Knee
Started2020
Completed1919
Not completed11

Outcome measures

PrimaryAssessment of Change in Pain and Function Before and After Treatment With Kujala´s Test: Presented as Percentages and 95% Confidence Interval.

The Kujala patellofemoral pain scale, is an assessment tool developed to assesses pain and function in patients with disorders of the patellofemoral joint and consists of 13 questions, each with three to five response options, scored from 0 to 5, or 0 to 10, depending on the question. The lowest possible total value is 0 and corresponds to patients who are in a worse functional health condition. The highest possible total value is 100, for those that do not have any alteration and are in optimal condition. The results below, are presented as percentages and 95% confidence interval.

Time frame:
The next table shows the distribution of the 13 domains of the Kujala´Test by intervention group at baseline (Time point 1, one day before intervention). "Assessed at baseline and after treatment, only baseline pre-specified to be reported".
Reported as:
Number · percentage of participants
Assessment of Change in Pain and Function Before and After Treatment With Kujala´s Test: Presented as Percentages and 95% Confidence Interval.
percentage of participantsCore, Hip and Knee.Hip and Knee
Percentage of participants with constant and severe pain20 (7.2 to 44.3)20 (7.2 to 44.3)
Percentage of participants with occasional severe pain20 (7.2 to 44.3)40 (20.5 to 63.2)
Percentage of participants with pain that interferes with sleep10 (2.31 to 34.2)10 (2.31 to 34.2)
Percentage of participants with mild and occasional pain50 (28.3 to 71.6)30 (13.4 to 54.1)
Percentage of participants with permanent inflammation10 (2.31 to 34.2)20 (7.2 to 44.3)
Percentage of participants with inflammation every night15 (4.5 to 39.2)0 (0 to 0)
Percentage of participants with inflammation with daily activities30 (13.4 to 54.1)10 (2.31 to 34.2)
Percentage of participants with inflammation after a great effort30 (13.4 to 54.1)30 (13.4 to 54.1)
Percentage of participants with not inflammation15 (4.5 to 39.2)40 (20.5 to 63.2)
Percentage of participants with severe atrophy0 (0 to 0)5 (0.6 to 30.6)
Percentage of participants with mild atrophy15 (4.5 to 39.2)30 (13.4 to 54.1)
Percentage of participants with not atrophy85 (60.7 to 95.4)70 (45.8 to 86.5)
Percentage of participants with lameness constantly10 (2.31 to 34.2)10 (2.31 to 34.2)
Percentage of participants with lameness a little, sometimes80 (55.6 to 92.7)75 (50.6 to 89.7)
Percentage of participants with no limp10 (2.31 to 34.2)15 (4.59 to 39.2)
Percentage of participants with impossible to support the limb10 (2.31 to 34.2)5 (0.6 to 30.6)
Percentage of participants with pain with limb support55 (32.4 to 75.6)80 (55.6 to 92.7)
Percentage of participants with the extremity completely painless35 (16.9 to 58.7)15 (4.59 to 39.2)
Percentage of participants that can't walk5 (0.6 to 30.6)5 (0.6 to 30.6)
Percentage of participants that can walk between 1-2 Km20 (7.2 to 44.3)25 (10.2 to 49.3)
Percentage of participants that can walk more than 2 km45 (24.3 to 67.5)45 (24.3 to 67.5)
Percentage of participants that can walk without limit30 (13.4 to 54.1)25 (10.2 to 49.3)
Percentage of participants that are not able to go up and down stairs5 (0.6 to 30.6)0 (0 to 0)
Percentage of participants with pain when going up and down the stairs50 (28.3 to 71.6)75 (54.9 to 95)
Percentage of participants with slight pain when going down the stairs45 (24.3 to 67.5)15 (4.59 to 39.2)
Percentage of participants that can go up and down the stairs without difficulty0 (0 to 0)10 (2.31 to 34.2)
Percentage of participants that can't do squats20 (7.2 to 44.39)0 (0 to 0)
Percentage of participants that can do squats with help5 (0.6 to 30.6)15 (4.59 to 39.2)
Percentage of participants that are always in pain when doing squats20 (0.6 to 30.6)40 (20.5 to 63.2)
Percentage of participants with pain when doing squats quickly25 (7.26 to 44.39)40 (20.5 to 63.2)
Percentage of participants squating without difficulty30 (13.4 to 54.1)5 (0.6 to 30.6)
Percentage of participants unable to remain seated with knees bent15 (4.59 to 39.2)0 (0 to 0)
Percentage of participants with pain forces him/her to extend his knees65 (41.2 to 83)70 (45.8 to 86.5)
Percentage of participants that are always in pain to sit with their knees bent10 (2.31 to 34.2)10 (2.31 to 34.2)
Percentage of participants with only pain if they have exercised5 (0.6 to 30.6)20 (7.26 to 44.3)
Percentage of participants with no problem sitting with their knees bent5 (0.6 to 30.6)0 (0 to 0)
Percentage of participants with more than two dislocations of the patella10 (2.31 to 34.2)10 (2.31 to 34.2)
Percentage of participants with less than a confirmed dislocation10 (2.31 to 34.2)15 (4.59 to 39.2)
Percentage of participants with dislocations occasionally with daily activities20 (7.26 to 44.36)40 (20.5 to 63.2)
Percentage of participants with dislocations occasionally with exercise30 (13.4 to 54.1)30 (13.4 to 54.1)
Percentage of participants with no dislocations of the patella30 (13.4 to 54.1)5 (0.6 to 30.6)
Percentage of participants with severe deficiency for knee flexion20 (7.26 to 44.3)5 (0.6 to 30.6)
Percentage of participants with mild deficiency for knee flexion70 (45.8 to 86.5)70 (45.8 to 86.5)
Percentage of participants with no deficiency for knee flexion10 (2.31 to 34.2)25 (10.2 to 49.3)
Percentage of participants unable to run25 (10.2 to 49.3)15 (4.59 to 39.2)
Percentage of participants with severe pain always when running0 (0 to 0)15 (4.59 to 39.2)
Percentage of participants with slight pain since starting to run25 (10.2 to 49.3)25 (10.2 to 49.3)
Percentage of participants with pain after 2 km of running35 (16.9 to 58.7)35 (16.9 to 58.7)
Percentage of participants that can run without limit15 (4.59 to 39.2)10 (2.31 to 34.2)
Percentage of participants unable to jump25 (10.2 to 49.3)30 (13.4 to 54.1)
Percentage of participants with permanent pain when jumping15 (4.59 to 39.2)20 (7.26 to 44.3)
Percentage of participants with slight difficulty jumping35 (16.9 to 58.7)35 (16.9 to 58.7)
Percentage of participants with no difficulty jumping25 (10.2 to 49.3)15 (4.59 to 39.2)
Statistical analysis
  • Core, Hip and Knee. vs Hip and Knee · Fisher Exact · p = <0.05 · Difference in frequency distribution: 0.05 · 95% CI 0.025 to 0.05we also used Chi-squared for the domains of pain and limp.
PrimaryAssessment of Change in Pain With Visual Analogue Scale

Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) is a numeric scale from 0 to 10 to measure pain (been 0 no pain and 10 worse pain).

Time frame:
The pain assessment will be done at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention)
Reported as:
Median · units on a scale
Assessment of Change in Pain With Visual Analogue Scale
units on a scaleCore, Hip and Knee.Hip and Knee
Initial VAS7.5 (5.5 to 9.0)7 (5.5 to 8.5)
Final VAS2.0 (0 to 2.0)2.0 (0 to 4.0)
Delta (Change between Initial and Final VAS)-6.0 (-10.0 to -4.0)-4.0 (-7.0 to -3.0)
Statistical analysis
  • Core, Hip and Knee. vs Hip and Knee · Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney) · p = <0.05 · Median difference (final values): 0.058Estimated Value was done for the assessment of change in pain with Visual Analogue Scale. The dispersion parameter that was calculated were interquartile ranges for the differences in medians between groups.
SecondaryChange in Patellofemoral Misalignment With Q Angle´s Exam

We measured the Q angle (degrees) between the border of the anterosuperior iliac spine, the center of the patella and the center of the tibia. the data result, shows the median values, and the interquartile range (IR) with a Delta change between measure number 1 and number 2.

Time frame:
The Q angle assessment will be done at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention).
Reported as:
Median · Degrees
Change in Patellofemoral Misalignment With Q Angle´s Exam
DegreesCore, Hip and Knee.Hip and Knee
Initial Rigth Knee19 (15 to 20)18 (15 to 20)
Final Rigth Knee18 (15 to 20)18 (15 to 20)
Delta or change between Time point 1 and 20 (-2 to 2)0 (-2 to 2)
Initial Left Knee18 (15 to 20)18 (15 to 20)
Final Left Knee18 (16 to 20)18 (15 to 20)
Delta or Change between Time point 1 and 20 (-2 to 2)0 (-2 to 2)
Statistical analysis
  • Core, Hip and Knee. vs Hip and Knee · Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney) · p = <0.05 · Median difference (final values): 0.75Estimated value was calculated for Change in Patellofemoral Misalignment With Q Angle´s Exam. The dispersion parameter that was calculated were interquartile ranges for the differences in medians between groups.
SecondaryChange in Core Strength With McGill´s Exam

The protocol consists of 3 tests that measure all aspects of torso strength via isometric muscle endurance 1.Trunk flexor test, 2.Trunk extensor test 3. Lateral musculature test (rigth and left side). t is a timed test involving a static, isometric contraction, until the individual exhibits fatigue and can no longer hold the assumed position. The goal of the test is to hold each position for as long as possible.

Time frame:
The Core strength assessment will be done at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention)
Reported as:
Median · seconds
Change in Core Strength With McGill´s Exam
secondsCore, Hip and Knee.Hip and Knee
Plank (Time Point 1)20.5 (12 to 32)30 (13.5 to 33.5)
Plank (Time Point 2)60 (45 to 70)35 (20 to 60)
Plank: Delta or change between Time point 1 and 237 (24 to 48)10 (2.0 to 15)
Lateral Plank (Right) (Time Point 1)15 (10 to 21)15 (9.5 to 20)
Lateral Plank (Right) (Time Point 2)45 (38 to 51)22 (16 to 38)
Rigth Lateral Plank: Delta or change between Time point 1 and 230 (19 to 36)6 (2 to 12)
Lateral Plank (Left) (Time Point 1)12.5 (10.5 to 19)18 (11 to 23)
Lateral Plank (Left) (Time Point 2)45 (36 to 56)21 (15 to 34)
Left Lateral Plank: Delta or change between Time point 1 and 230 (17 to 40)5 (-2 to 10)
Trunk Extension (Time Point 1)13.5 (6.0 to 26.5)13.5 (2.5 to 20)
Trunk Extension (Time Point 2)61 (50 to 75)30 (15 to 60)
Trunk Extension: Delta or change between Time point 1 and 249 (30 to 55)15 (7 to 34)
Statistical analysis
  • Core, Hip and Knee. vs Hip and Knee · Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney) · p = <0.05 · Median difference (final values): 0.001Estimated Value was calculated for the change in core strength with McGill´s Exam. The dispersion parameter that was calculated were interquartile ranges for the differences in medians between groups.
SecondaryChange in Quadriceps and Gluteus Strength With Squat´s Test

Squat Test is a field test, easy and simple to assess the Gluteus and quadriceps muscles strength.

Time frame:
Quadriceps and gluteus Strength assessment will be done at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention)
Reported as:
Median · seconds
Change in Quadriceps and Gluteus Strength With Squat´s Test
secondsCore, Hip and Knee.Hip and Knee
Squats (Time Point 1)10 (8 to 18.5)12.5 (8.5 to 20)
Squats (Time point 2)35 (30 to 38)35 (29 to 38)
Delta or Change (Between Time 1 and 2)20 (18 to 25)20 (15 to 24)
Statistical analysis
  • Core, Hip and Knee. vs Hip and Knee · Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney) · p = <0.05 · Median difference (final values): 0.670Estimated value was calculated for the change in Quadriceps and Gluteus Strength With Squat´s Test. The dispersion parameter that was calculated were interquartile ranges for the differences in medians between groups.
SecondaryChange in Static Balance With Single Leg Stance

This test is used to evaluate the control of postural and static balance with the eyes open and closed in seconds. (if the participant does not complete the 45 seconds framework is thought to be lacking of equilibrium).

Time frame:
Static Balance assesment will be done at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention)
Reported as:
Median · seconds
Change in Static Balance With Single Leg Stance
secondsCore, Hip and Knee.Hip and Knee
Initial Balance with eyes open (Right leg)11.5 (0 to 25.5)7.5 (0 to 30)
Final Balance with eyes open (Right leg)45 (45 to 45)45 (45 to 45)
Balance with eyes open (Right leg): Delta or change between Time point 1 and 211.5 (0 to 25.5)7.5 (0 to 30)
Initial Balance with eyes open (Left leg)9.5 (0 to 21.5)20 (0 to 30)
Final Balance with eyes open (Left leg)45 (45 to 45)45 (45 to 45)
Balance with eyes open (Left leg): Delta or change between time point 1 and 29.5 (0 to 21.5)20 (0 to 30)
Initial Balance with eyes closed (Right leg)20 (14 to 27.5)19 (9.5 to 24)
Final Balance with eyes closed (Right leg)28.5 (21 to 35)23.5 (16.5 to 31.5)
Balance with eyes closed (Right leg): Delta or change between time point 1 and 220 (14 to 27.5)19 (9.5 to 24)
Initial Balance with eyes closed (Left leg)24.5 (13 to 30.5)20 (10.5 to 30.5)
Final Balance with eyes closed (Left leg)30 (23.5 to 38)20 (10.5 to 30.5)
Balance with eyes closed (Left leg): Delta or change between time point 1 and 224.5 (13 to 30.5)20 (10.5 to 30.5)
Statistical analysis
  • Core, Hip and Knee. vs Hip and Knee · Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney) · p = <0.05 · Median difference (final values): 0.55
SecondaryChange in the Total Amount (Work, Transport, Home and Recreation) of Physical Activity Reported in Minutes and Measured With The International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Long Form

The amount of physical activity places patients in 1 to 3 categories: 1. Low/inactive: do not meet criteria for categories 2 or 3. 2. Moderate: meet 1 the following: a. 3 or more days with at least 20 minutes of vigorous activity b. 5 or more days with at least 30 minutes of moderate-intensity activity or walking. c. 5 or more days with any combination of walking, moderate-intensity, or vigorous intensity activities with at least 600 MET-min/week. 3. High: meet 1 of the following: a. 3 or more days of vigorous-intensity activity and at least 1500 MET-min/week. b. 7 days of any combination of walking moderate-intensity, or vigorous intensity activities with at least 3000 MET-min/week. We decided to add the time in minutes for each category of the IPAQ (work, transport, home and recreation), to obtain a more objective calculation, and to be able to make comparisons between the two different time points.

Time frame:
Physical Activity will be measured at two different time points (Time point 1 is baseline, one day before intervention and Time point 2 is 8 weeks post-intervention)
Reported as:
Median · minutes
Change in the Total Amount (Work, Transport, Home and Recreation) of Physical Activity Reported in Minutes and Measured With The International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Long Form
minutesCore, Hip and Knee.Hip and Knee
Initial IPAQ Total Minutes3003 (1116 to 4638)1617 (944 to 6138)
Final IPAQ Total Minutes4275 (2587 to 6522)4598 (2888 to 7344)
Delta or change between Time point 1 and 21539 (807 to 2457)1977 (1191 to 2815)
Statistical analysis
  • Core, Hip and Knee. vs Hip and Knee · Wilcoxon (Mann-Whitney) · p = <0.05 · Median difference (final values): 0.492

Adverse events

Collected over Through study completion, about 8 weeks.. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Core, Hip and Knee.0/20 (0%)0/20 (0%)0/20 (0%)
Hip and Knee0/20 (0%)0/20 (0%)0/20 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)Core, Hip and Knee.Hip and KneeTotal
Age — <=18 years224
Age — Between 18 and 65 years181836
Age — >=65 years000
Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Core, Hip and Knee.Hip and KneeTotal
Median32.5 (25.5 to 38)29 (25 to 36.5)30.75 (25.25 to 37.25)
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Core, Hip and Knee.Hip and KneeTotal
Female181836
Male224
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected
Race and Ethnicity Not Collected(Participants)Core, Hip and Knee.Hip and KneeTotal
Count of participants——0
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(Participants)Core, Hip and Knee.Hip and KneeTotal
Colombia202040
Height
Height(cm)Core, Hip and Knee.Hip and KneeTotal
Median160 (156.5 to 167)159.5 (154 to 163)159.75 (155.25 to 165)
BMI
BMI(kg/m^2)Core, Hip and Knee.Hip and KneeTotal
Median25.4 (21.5 to 27.9)23.8 (22.3 to 25.2)24.6 (21.9 to 26.55)
Fat Percent
Fat Percent(percent)Core, Hip and Knee.Hip and KneeTotal
Median35.4 (28.9 to 40.4)35.4 (24.5 to 38.7)35.4 (26.7 to 39.6)

3 further baseline measures are reported on the registry.

08

Study locations

1 site
  • Universidad Nacional de Colombia
    Bogotá, 111321, Colombia
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Fulkerson JP. A Practical Guide to Understanding and Treating Patellofemoral Pain. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2017 Mar/Apr;46(2):101-103. PubMed 28437495 ↗
  • Witvrouw E, Sneyers C, Lysens R, Victor J, Bellemans J. Reflex response times of vastus medialis oblique and vastus lateralis in normal subjects and in subjects with patellofemoral pain syndrome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1996 Sep;24(3):160-5. doi: 10.2519/jospt.1996.24.3.160. PubMed 8866275 ↗
  • Van Der Heijden RA, Lankhorst NE, Van Linschoten R, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Van Middelkoop M. Exercise for treating patellofemoral pain syndrome: an abridged version of Cochrane systematic review. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2016 Feb;52(1):110-33. Epub 2015 Jul 9. PubMed 26158920 ↗
  • Selfe J, Janssen J, Callaghan M, Witvrouw E, Sutton C, Richards J, Stokes M, Martin D, Dixon J, Hogarth R, Baltzopoulos V, Ritchie E, Arden N, Dey P. Are there three main subgroups within the patellofemoral pain population? A detailed characterisation study of 127 patients to help develop targeted intervention (TIPPs). Br J Sports Med. 2016 Jul;50(14):873-80. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2015-094792. Epub 2016 Feb 1. PubMed 26834185 ↗
  • Grelsamer RP. Patellar nomenclature: the Tower of Babel revisited. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 Jul;(436):60-5. PubMed 15995421 ↗
  • Bloomer BA, Durall CJ. Does the Addition of Hip Strengthening to a Knee-Focused Exercise Program Improve Outcomes in Patients With Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome? J Sport Rehabil. 2015 Nov;24(4):428-33. doi: 10.1123/jsr.2014-0184. Epub 2014 Oct 29. PubMed 25365356 ↗
  • De Blaiser C, Roosen P, Willems T, Danneels L, Bossche LV, De Ridder R. Is core stability a risk factor for lower extremity injuries in an athletic population? A systematic review. Phys Ther Sport. 2018 Mar;30:48-56. doi: 10.1016/j.ptsp.2017.08.076. Epub 2017 Aug 24. PubMed 29246794 ↗

Study documents

  • Study protocol · Jul 1, 2018
  • Statistical analysis plan · Jul 1, 2018
  • Informed consent form · Jul 1, 2018

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — The investigators are not yet sure of sharing the IPD (individual participant data) of this study because they want to publish an article first and then decide.

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Nov 23, 2021, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04011436
Lead sponsor
Universidad Nacional de Colombia
Responsible party
Luisa Fernanda Prieto Garcia (Physical Therapist and Master´ candidate in Physical Therapist in Sport and Physical Activity, Universidad Nacional de Colombia) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jul 8, 2019
Start date
Aug 15, 2018
Primary completion
Jan 13, 2019
Completion
Apr 13, 2019
Results posted
Nov 23, 2021
Last update
Nov 23, 2021

Study contacts

Juan Alzate Granados
study chair · Universidad Nacional de Colombia

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion