CClinicalTrials.gg
TerminatedNCT05617911Updated Dec 10, 2025Results posted

Clinical Comparison of Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome Outcomes After Blood Flow Restriction Therapy

An interventional study of Blood Flow Restriction Cuff and Sham and standard of Care Therapy in Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome and Anterior Knee Pain Syndrome, sponsored by Gaylord Hospital, Inc. Terminated at 6 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 15 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-12-10.

Sponsored by Gaylord Hospital, Inc · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Why this study was terminated
Study terminated due to lack of recruitment.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
1
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
15 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this study is to determine if Blood Flow Restriction therapy improves patient related outcomes in those diagnosed with Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome compared to those in the sham comparator control group.

Read the detailed description

Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome (PFPS), also known as Non-Specific Anterior Knee Pain (AKP), is a non-specific musculoskeletal condition characterized by loss of function and pain localized to the patella. PFPS affects up to 22% of the general population yearly, with females affected more so than males. Adolescents (28%, mixed gender) and elite athletes (up to 35% in knee dominant sports such as cycling) are also commonly affected, making this a relatively widespread condition. Additionally, PFPS has a generally unfavorable prognosis, with up to 40% of individuals failing conservative treatment after 1 year, and 57% reporting continued symptoms for 5 to 8-years following. Higher levels of baseline disability and longer duration of symptoms lead to an even poorer prognosis, making early recognition and novel treatments key. To complicate things further, the presence of negative psychosocial factors is commonly found in this population and may be a greater predictor of outcomes than physical ones.

Previously, biomechanical factors, such as maltracking of the patella and chondromalacia, have been called into question as potential causes of PFPS symptoms. However, both are now thought to be potential consequences of having PFPS. That being said, PFPS is generally accepted as a non-specific condition as there may be a number of different structures implicated as potential nociceptive drivers, and determining the exact tissue does not seem to be important to overall management strategies. This finding, in connection with the high prevalence of negative psychosocial factors, points less to a physiologically driven condition, and more towards a pain driven condition. While this theoretically makes diagnosing and treatment selection more ubiquitous, there does not seem to be a clear treatment strategy that works best for all patients. Despite a clear biomechanical cause, adjusting exercise selection or technique to include different loads and forces on the patella is still warranted based on patient presentation. For example, during open chain knee extension, the lowest loads are placed on the patella between 90- and 45-degree flexion, and open chain between 0 and 60 degrees. People with PFPS often benefit from adjusting the exercise selection, technique and load.

Recent research compared multiple different exercise strategies (combined core and hip work, knee work only, and open vs closed-chain), without any one program showing significant advantage over the others. A combination of these approaches may be best. One theme within PFPS exercise research that appears consistent is the high level of sensitivity and poor response to treatment where higher levels of pain are present. This is in contrast to tendon related pain, such as patellar tendinopathy, where working into moderate levels of pain seems to be helpful for outcomes.

The main mechanism driving improvements following exercise therapy for PFPS is not hypertrophy, but rather thought to be exercise induced hypoalgesia. This is a phenomenon where performing both acute bouts, as well as regular exercise (aerobic and resistance), reduces pain both in the short and long terms. Since exercise seems to reduce pain in both local and distant sites of the exercising area, it is thought to provide both local and systemic pain reducing effects. The magnitude and duration of the exercise seems to play an important role as well, with higher intensity and longer durations of exercising producing greater effects.

Since patients with PFPS are unable to achieve these desired parameters, alternative strategies need to be investigated. Two options may be blood flow restriction (BFR) therapy and low load training to failure, both of which may capture some of the hypoalgesic effects while minimizing AKP. BFR involves the application of an external device to reduce arterial blood flow to the exercising area, while largely occluding venous return from that same area. Exercise intensities generally range from 20-30% of the patients' 1 repetition maximum (1RM) weight, with relatively high repetitions (sometimes to failure); this is opposed to traditional resistance training at 70%+ of 1RM. BFR training has been demonstrated to amplify the effects of exercise induced hypoalgesia (in addition to a host of other physiological benefits) through unconfirmed mechanisms. Leading theories suggest that the lack of available oxygen to the exercising area may lead to: the activation of the endogenous opioid and cannabinoid systems; systemic changes to the cardiovascular system; or increased number of metabolites such as hydrogen ions and lactic acid, which may also be contributing factors.

Clinical research on the application of BFR in patients with PFPS has been both limited and mixed, with only two trials having been conducted in this area. One study from 2017 looked at high-load with BFR placebo, versus low-load BFR with leg press and knee extensions. Only the high-load group showed a modest medium-term effect on pain, lowering it for \~24 hours after BFR over the training period. The other paper from 2022 included both knee and hip strengthening exercises, comparing a low-load BFR group versus a high-load training group with no placebo; of note, the programs were not equated in terms of exercises completed. In this study, no significant difference was observed between groups. To date, there have been limited to no sham arms in studies where a BFR cuff was used. Given the potential for placebo effects, this was an important consideration in the design of the study.

Given the heterogeneity of these two studies, and the paucity of research in this area, the aim of the current study is to compare a low load training to failure (with BFR placebo) to low load BFR training to failure on the effect of pain related outcomes, function, strength and other measures. We hypothesize that BFR training will improve objective and subjective outcomes in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) more than standard therapy with a sham BFR cuff.

Research aim 1: Determine whether the use of BFR improves patient-perceived function through a series of subjective patient-reported outcome measurements (PROs) throughout long-term recovery compared to patients in the sham control group. While we anticipate both groups may show improvement over time, we hypothesize that patients using BFR and the prescribed physical therapy protocol will demonstrate significantly improved PRO scores compared to the sham control group. These PROs include the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain (KOOS-PF), the Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE), the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) Pain Scale 1-10. Participants will be asked to complete PRO at the start of physical therapy (i.e. baseline), 4-weeks, 9-weeks or patient discharge if it is before the scheduled 9-week assessment, 6-month, and 12-month timepoints.

Research aim 2: Determine whether the use of BFR improves objective outcome measurements throughout prescribed physical therapy sessions compared to patients in the control group. While we anticipate both groups may show improvement over time, we hypothesize that patients using BFR and the prescribed physical therapy protocol will demonstrate significantly improved quadriceps isometric strength over the sham control group. Outcomes will be measured at the start of the physical therapy (i.e. baseline), 4-weeks, and 9-weeks or patient discharge if it is before the scheduled 9-week assessment.

02

Conditions studied

  • Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome
  • Anterior Knee Pain Syndrome

Keywords

  • Blood Flow Restriction
  • Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome
  • Physical Therapy
  • Non-Specific Anterior Knee Pain
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 1 is below the median of 45 across 242 interventional studies indexed under Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome.

Browse Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome studies →

Lead sponsor

Gaylord Hospital, Inc is the lead sponsor of 7 studies on the registry; none are open to participants now.

Of its 6 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 6 (100%) have results posted.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
15 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Diagnosis of patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) or non-specific anterior knee pain (NSAKP) and plan to attend Gaylord Specialty Healthcare Physical Therapy

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

Member of a defined vulnerable population, women who are or suspected to be pregnant, prisoners, children under 15, or other protected populations

Body mass of the leg preventing the cuff from fitting properly

Radiographic evidence of osteoarthritis (≥ Kellgren-Lawrence Grade 2)

History of intra-articular injection into either knee within 3 -months

Uncontrolled or untreated inflammatory disorder

Acute inflammatory disorder

Uncontrolled Diabetes and/or peripheral neuropathy, impaired circulation

Uncontrolled cardiac conditions including uncontrolled hypertension

Areas of thrombophlebitis, thrombosis

Distal wounds or pain below the knee >4/10

History of or current rhabdomyolysis

Prolonged immobilization (>3 months)

Sickle cell anemia

Lymphadenectomy

Varicose veins, or a history of personal or immediate family history (parental or sibling) of deep vein thrombosis

Current infection at or below the level of cuff placement

Malignancies in or below the area to be treated

Other conditions/medications that would interfere with subject safety or data collection in the opinion of the PI

Subjects with an increased risk of non-response as determined by the therapist

Once entered in the study, a diagnosis change that affects participation

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
1 participant (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Blood flow restriction and standard of care therapy

    The experimental BFR therapy will be incorporated into the standard therapy sessions and will not elongate the treatment session, quantity of sessions or incur any additional cost. As the participant progresses over time in therapy sessions, the discretion of the PT will determine when they have graduated beyond receiving any benefit from BFRT as demonstrated by quad strength.

    Device: Blood Flow Restriction Cuff

  • Placebo comparator
    Sham and standard of care therapy

    The sham comparator control group will also follow the Exercise Protocol in their physical therapy sessions with a non inflated blood flow restriction cuff attached in the same position as the experimental group. Similar to the intervention group, as participant's progress in therapy, the Physical Therapist will use their clinical decision making to advance the person through resistance and repetition increases.

    Procedure: Sham and standard of Care Therapy

Interventions

  • DeviceBlood Flow Restriction Cuff

    Blood Flow Restriction (BFR) involves the application of an external device to reduce arterial blood flow to the exercising area, while largely occluding venous return from that same area.

  • ProcedureSham and standard of Care Therapy

    SoC PT + non-inflated BFR cuff

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Numeric Pain Rating Scale: Enrollment

    The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

  2. Numeric Pain Rating Scale: 1 Week

    The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 1-week into treatment

  3. Numeric Pain Rating Scale: 4 Weeks

    The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

  4. Numeric Pain Rating Scale: 9 Weeks/Discharge

    The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

  5. Numeric Pain Rating Scale: 6 Months

    The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

  6. Numeric Pain Rating Scale: 12 Months

    The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

  7. Lower Extremity Functional Scale: Enrollment

    The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

  8. Lower Extremity Functional Scale: 1 Week

    The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 1-week into treatment.

  9. Lower Extremity Functional Scale: 4 Weeks

    The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

  10. Lower Extremity Functional Scale: 9 Weeks/Discharge

    The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

  11. Lower Extremity Functional Scale: 6 Months

    The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

  12. Lower Extremity Functional Scale: 12 Months

    The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

  13. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: Enrollment

    The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

  14. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: 1 Week

    The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected1-week into treatment.

  15. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: 4 Weeks

    The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

  16. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: 9 Weeks/Discharge

    The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

  17. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: 6 Months

    The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

  18. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: 12 Months

    The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

  19. Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation: Enrollment

    The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

  20. Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation: 1 Week

    The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 1-week into treatment.

  21. Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation: 4 Weeks

    The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

  22. Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation: 9 Weeks/Discharge

    The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

  23. Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation: 6 Months

    The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

  24. Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation: 12 Months

    The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

  25. Tenger Activity Scale: Enrollment

    The Tenger Activity Scale aims to provide a standardized method in determining the level of activity prior to injury and level of activity post injury that can be documented on a numerical scale.

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected upon enrollment.

  26. Tenger Activity Scale: 6 Months

    The Tenger Activity Scale aims to provide a standardized method in determining the level of activity prior to injury and level of activity post injury that can be documented on a numerical scale.

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

  27. Tenger Activity Scale: 12 Months

    The Tenger Activity Scale aims to provide a standardized method in determining the level of activity prior to injury and level of activity post injury that can be documented on a numerical scale.

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

  28. Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: Enrollment

    The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

  29. Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: 1 Week

    The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 1-week into treatment.

  30. Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: 4 Weeks

    The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

  31. Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: 9 Weeks/Discharge

    The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

  32. Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: 6 Months

    The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

  33. Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: 12 Months

    The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Quadricep Isometric Strength: Enrollment

    Quadricep Isometric Strength is the amount of strength shown in a patient's quadricep muscle via isometric dynomometry

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

  2. Quadricep Isometric Strength: 1 Week

    Quadricep Isometric Strength is the amount of strength shown in a patient's quadricep muscle via isometric dynomometry

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 1-week into treatment.

  3. Quadricep Isometric Strength: 4 Weeks

    Quadricep Isometric Strength is the amount of strength shown in a patient's quadricep muscle via isometric dynomometry

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

  4. Quadricep Isometric Strength: 9 Weeks/Discharge

    Quadricep Isometric Strength is the amount of strength shown in a patient's quadricep muscle via isometric dynomometry

    Time frame: This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

07

Results

Posted Dec 10, 2025

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneBlood Flow Restriction and Standard of Care TherapySham and Standard of Care Therapy
Started10
Completed00
Not completed10
Withdrew: Withdrawal by subject10

Outcome measures

PrimaryNumeric Pain Rating Scale: Enrollment

The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryNumeric Pain Rating Scale: 1 Week

The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 1-week into treatment

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryNumeric Pain Rating Scale: 4 Weeks

The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryNumeric Pain Rating Scale: 9 Weeks/Discharge

The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryNumeric Pain Rating Scale: 6 Months

The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryNumeric Pain Rating Scale: 12 Months

The Numeric Pain Rating Scale is one question pain intensity scale that assesses the current, best, and worst pain level in the last 24 hours

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryLower Extremity Functional Scale: Enrollment

The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryLower Extremity Functional Scale: 1 Week

The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 1-week into treatment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryLower Extremity Functional Scale: 4 Weeks

The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryLower Extremity Functional Scale: 9 Weeks/Discharge

The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryLower Extremity Functional Scale: 6 Months

The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryLower Extremity Functional Scale: 12 Months

The LEFS is a 20 question survey that is a valid PROM used for the measurement of lower extremity function based on the patients' initial function, ongoing progress, and long-term outcome

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryKnee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: Enrollment

The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryKnee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: 1 Week

The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected1-week into treatment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryKnee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: 4 Weeks

The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryKnee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: 9 Weeks/Discharge

The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryKnee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: 6 Months

The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryKnee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Patellofemoral Pain: 12 Months

The KOOS-PF is an 11 question survey that is used to assess five outcomes; they include knee related Quality of Life, activities of daily living, sport and recreation function, activities, pain and symptoms

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimarySingle Assessment Numerical Evaluation: Enrollment

The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimarySingle Assessment Numerical Evaluation: 1 Week

The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 1-week into treatment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimarySingle Assessment Numerical Evaluation: 4 Weeks

The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimarySingle Assessment Numerical Evaluation: 9 Weeks/Discharge

The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimarySingle Assessment Numerical Evaluation: 6 Months

The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimarySingle Assessment Numerical Evaluation: 12 Months

The SANE is a two item questionnaire used globally to assess function

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryTenger Activity Scale: Enrollment

The Tenger Activity Scale aims to provide a standardized method in determining the level of activity prior to injury and level of activity post injury that can be documented on a numerical scale.

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected upon enrollment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryTenger Activity Scale: 6 Months

The Tenger Activity Scale aims to provide a standardized method in determining the level of activity prior to injury and level of activity post injury that can be documented on a numerical scale.

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryTenger Activity Scale: 12 Months

The Tenger Activity Scale aims to provide a standardized method in determining the level of activity prior to injury and level of activity post injury that can be documented on a numerical scale.

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryFear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: Enrollment

The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryFear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: 1 Week

The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 1-week into treatment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryFear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: 4 Weeks

The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryFear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: 9 Weeks/Discharge

The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryFear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: 6 Months

The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 6 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

PrimaryFear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire: 12 Months

The Fear Avoidance Belief Questionnaire is a 16 question likert scale questionnaire aimed at assessing how everyday activities assess the patient's current level of pain

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 12 months post start date.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

SecondaryQuadricep Isometric Strength: Enrollment

Quadricep Isometric Strength is the amount of strength shown in a patient's quadricep muscle via isometric dynomometry

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected upon enrollment in the study.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

SecondaryQuadricep Isometric Strength: 1 Week

Quadricep Isometric Strength is the amount of strength shown in a patient's quadricep muscle via isometric dynomometry

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 1-week into treatment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

SecondaryQuadricep Isometric Strength: 4 Weeks

Quadricep Isometric Strength is the amount of strength shown in a patient's quadricep muscle via isometric dynomometry

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 4-weeks into treatment.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

SecondaryQuadricep Isometric Strength: 9 Weeks/Discharge

Quadricep Isometric Strength is the amount of strength shown in a patient's quadricep muscle via isometric dynomometry

Time frame:
This assessment will be collected 9-weeks into treatment or at discharge, whatever comes first.

No measurements were reported for this outcome.

Adverse events

Collected over 1 participant withdrew, no participants were monitored/assessed for adverse events. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
Blood Flow Restriction and Standard of Care Therapy———
Sham and Standard of Care Therapy———

Baseline characteristics

Study terminated.

Age, Continuous
Age, ContinuousBlood Flow Restriction and Standard of Care TherapySham and Standard of Care TherapyTotal
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, MaleBlood Flow Restriction and Standard of Care TherapySham and Standard of Care TherapyTotal
Female———
Male———
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)Blood Flow Restriction and Standard of Care TherapySham and Standard of Care TherapyTotal
American Indian or Alaska Native———
Asian———
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander———
Black or African American———
White———
More than one race———
Unknown or Not Reported———
08

Study locations

6 sites
  • Gaylord Specialty Healthcare Outpatient Physical Therapy; Cheshire
    Cheshire, Connecticut 06410, United States
  • Gaylord Specialty Healthcare Outpatient Physical Therapy; Cromwell
    Cromwell, Connecticut 06416, United States
  • University of Connecticut Health Center
    Farmington, Connecticut 06030, United States
  • Gaylord Specialty Healthcare Outpatient Physical Therapy; Madison
    Madison, Connecticut 06443, United States
  • Gaylord Hospital
    Wallingford, Connecticut 06492, United States
  • Gaylord Specialty Healthcare Outpatient Physical Therapy; Wallingford
    Wallingford, Connecticut 06492, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Smith BE, Selfe J, Thacker D, Hendrick P, Bateman M, Moffatt F, Rathleff MS, Smith TO, Logan P. Incidence and prevalence of patellofemoral pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2018 Jan 11;13(1):e0190892. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190892. eCollection 2018. PubMed 29324820 ↗
  • Collins NJ, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Crossley KM, van Linschoten RL, Vicenzino B, van Middelkoop M. Prognostic factors for patellofemoral pain: a multicentre observational analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2013 Mar;47(4):227-33. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2012-091696. Epub 2012 Dec 13. PubMed 23242955 ↗
  • Lankhorst NE, van Middelkoop M, Crossley KM, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Oei EH, Vicenzino B, Collins NJ. Factors that predict a poor outcome 5-8 years after the diagnosis of patellofemoral pain: a multicentre observational analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2016 Jul;50(14):881-6. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2015-094664. Epub 2015 Oct 13. PubMed 26463119 ↗
  • Maclachlan LR, Matthews M, Hodges PW, Collins NJ, Vicenzino B. The psychological features of patellofemoral pain: a cross-sectional study. Scand J Pain. 2018 Apr 25;18(2):261-271. doi: 10.1515/sjpain-2018-0025. PubMed 29794307 ↗
  • Post WR, Dye SF. Patellofemoral Pain: An Enigma Explained by Homeostasis and Common Sense. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2017 Mar/Apr;46(2):92-100. PubMed 28437494 ↗
  • Saltychev M, Dutton RA, Laimi K, Beaupre GS, Virolainen P, Fredericson M. Effectiveness of conservative treatment for patellofemoral pain syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Rehabil Med. 2018 May 8;50(5):393-401. doi: 10.2340/16501977-2295. PubMed 29392329 ↗
  • Powers CM, Ho KY, Chen YJ, Souza RB, Farrokhi S. Patellofemoral joint stress during weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing quadriceps exercises. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014 May;44(5):320-7. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2014.4936. Epub 2014 Mar 27. PubMed 24673446 ↗
  • Collins NJ, Barton CJ, van Middelkoop M, Callaghan MJ, Rathleff MS, Vicenzino BT, Davis IS, Powers CM, Macri EM, Hart HF, de Oliveira Silva D, Crossley KM. 2018 Consensus statement on exercise therapy and physical interventions (orthoses, taping and manual therapy) to treat patellofemoral pain: recommendations from the 5th International Patellofemoral Pain Research Retreat, Gold Coast, Australia, 2017. Br J Sports Med. 2018 Sep;52(18):1170-1178. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2018-099397. Epub 2018 Jun 20. PubMed 29925502 ↗
  • Kountouris A, Cook J. Rehabilitation of Achilles and patellar tendinopathies. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2007 Apr;21(2):295-316. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2006.12.003. PubMed 17512484 ↗
  • Song JS, Spitz RW, Yamada Y, Bell ZW, Wong V, Abe T, Loenneke JP. Exercise-induced hypoalgesia and pain reduction following blood flow restriction: A brief review. Phys Ther Sport. 2021 Jul;50:89-96. doi: 10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.04.005. Epub 2021 Apr 23. PubMed 33940556 ↗
  • Misra G, Paris TA, Archer DB, Coombes SA. Dose-response effect of isometric force production on the perception of pain. PLoS One. 2014 Feb 4;9(2):e88105. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0088105. eCollection 2014. PubMed 24505397 ↗
  • Hughes L, Patterson SD. The effect of blood flow restriction exercise on exercise-induced hypoalgesia and endogenous opioid and endocannabinoid mechanisms of pain modulation. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2020 Apr 1;128(4):914-924. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00768.2019. Epub 2020 Feb 27. PubMed 32105522 ↗
  • Giles L, Webster KE, McClelland J, Cook JL. Quadriceps strengthening with and without blood flow restriction in the treatment of patellofemoral pain: a double-blind randomised trial. Br J Sports Med. 2017 Dec;51(23):1688-1694. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096329. Epub 2017 May 12. PubMed 28500081 ↗
  • Constantinou A, Mamais I, Papathanasiou G, Lamnisos D, Stasinopoulos D. Comparing hip and knee focused exercises versus hip and knee focused exercises with the use of blood flow restriction training in adults with patellofemoral pain. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2022 Apr;58(2):225-235. doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.22.06691-6. Epub 2022 Jan 5. PubMed 34985237 ↗
  • Dolak KL, Silkman C, Medina McKeon J, Hosey RG, Lattermann C, Uhl TL. Hip strengthening prior to functional exercises reduces pain sooner than quadriceps strengthening in females with patellofemoral pain syndrome: a randomized clinical trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011 Aug;41(8):560-70. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2011.3499. Epub 2011 Jun 7. PubMed 21654093 ↗
  • Sisk D, Fredericson M. Update of Risk Factors, Diagnosis, and Management of Patellofemoral Pain. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2019 Dec;12(4):534-541. doi: 10.1007/s12178-019-09593-z. PubMed 31773479 ↗
  • Brightwell BD, Stone A, Li X, Hardy P, Thompson K, Noehren B, Jacobs C. Blood flow Restriction training After patellar INStability (BRAINS Trial). Trials. 2022 Jan 28;23(1):88. doi: 10.1186/s13063-022-06017-1. PubMed 35090543 ↗
  • Thiebaud RS, Yasuda T, Loenneke JP, Abe T. Effects of low-intensity concentric and eccentric exercise combined with blood flow restriction on indices of exercise-induced muscle damage. Interv Med Appl Sci. 2013 Jun;5(2):53-9. doi: 10.1556/IMAS.5.2013.2.1. Epub 2013 Jul 4. PubMed 24265891 ↗

Study documents

  • Protocol and statistical analysis plan · Oct 10, 2023

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

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — Deidentified data will become available to researchers that are interesting after analysis has been completed. Data will be available for 3 years after the date of completion.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Sap, Icf, Csr

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 10, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05617911
Lead sponsor
Gaylord Hospital, Inc
Collaborators
UConn Health
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Nov 16, 2022
Start date
Nov 15, 2022
Primary completion
Oct 10, 2023
Completion
Oct 10, 2023
Results posted
Dec 10, 2025
Last update
Dec 10, 2025

Study contacts

Eric Sokolowski
principal investigator · Physical Therapist
Danielle Letendre
principal investigator · Physical Therapist

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is terminated, as verified in Nov 2025. 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