You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 50, Issue 14
  • 2016 Patellofemoral pain consensus statement from the 4th International Patellofemoral Pain Research Retreat, Manchester. Part 1: Terminology, definitions, clinical examination, natural history, patellofemoral osteoarthritis and patient-reported outcome …

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Consensus statement
2016 Patellofemoral pain consensus statement from the 4th International Patellofemoral Pain Research Retreat, Manchester. Part 1: Terminology, definitions, clinical examination, natural history, patellofemoral osteoarthritis and patient-reported outcome measures
  1. Kay M Crossley1,
  2. Joshua J Stefanik2,
  3. James Selfe3,
  4. Natalie J Collins4,
  5. Irene S Davis5,
  6. Christopher M Powers6,
  7. Jenny McConnell7,
  8. Bill Vicenzino4,
  9. David M Bazett-Jones8,
  10. Jean-Francois Esculier9,
  11. Dylan Morrissey10,11,
  12. Michael J Callaghan12,13
  1. 1La Trobe Sport and Exercise Medicine Research Centre, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia
  2. 2Department of Physical Therapy, Movement & Rehabilitation Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  3. 3Faculty of Health, Psychology and Social Care, Department of Health Professions. Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK
  4. 4School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  5. 5Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spaulding National Running Centre, Harvard Medical School, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
  6. 6Division of Biokinesiology & Physical Therapy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA
  7. 7McConnell Physiotherapy Group, Mosman, New South Wales, Australia
  8. 8Department of Physical Therapy, Carroll University, Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
  9. 9Faculty of Medicine, Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation and Social Integration Universite Laval, Quebec, Quebec, Canada
  10. 10Centre for Sport and Exercise Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
  11. 11Physiotherapy Department, Bart's Health NHS Trust, London, UK
  12. 12Faculty of Health, Psychology and Social Care, School of Health Professions. Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK
  13. 13Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  1. Correspondence to Professor Michael J Callaghan, Faculty of Health, Psychology and Social Care, School of Health Professions. Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, UK

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2016-096384

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Introduction

    Patellofemoral pain (PFP) typically presents as diffuse anterior knee pain, usually with activities such as squatting, running, stair ascent and descent. It is common in active individuals across the lifespan,1–4 and is a frequent cause for presentation at physiotherapy, general practice, orthopaedic and sports medicine clinics in particular.5 ,6 Its impact is profound, often reducing the ability of those with PFP to perform sporting, physical activity and work-related activities pain-free. Increasing evidence suggests that it is a recalcitrant condition, persisting for many years.7–9 In an attempt to share recent innovations, build on the first three successful biennial retreats and define the ‘state of the art’ for this common, impactful condition; the 4th International Patellofemoral Pain Research Retreat was convened.

    The 4th International Patellofemoral Research Retreat was held in Manchester, UK, over 3 days (September 2–4th, 2015). After undergoing peer-review for scientific merit and relevance to the retreat, 67 abstracts were accepted for the retreat (50 podium presentations, and 17 short presentations). The podium and short presentations were grouped into five categories; (1) PFP, (2) factors that influence PFP (3) the trunk and lower extremity (4) interventions and (5) systematic analyses. Three keynote speakers were chosen for their scientific contribution in the area of PFP. Professor Andrew Amis spoke on the biomechanics of the patellofemoral joint. Professor David Felson spoke on patellofemoral arthritis,10 and Dr Michael Ratleff's keynote theme was PFP in the adolescent patient.11 As part of the retreat, we held structured, whole-group discussions in order to develop consensus relating to the work presented at the meeting as well as evidence gathered from the literature.

    Consensus development process

    In our past three International Patellofemoral Research Retreats, we developed a consensus statement addressing different presentation categories.12–14 In Manchester in 2015, we revised the format. For the exercise and physical interventions, we developed consensus based on reviews of systematic reviews, and these are reported in a companion publication.15 For factors contributing to PFP, Professor Christopher Powers facilitated the discussion and development of consensus, which is published in another companion publication. For the remaining topics of terminology, definitions/diagnosis and features of clinical examination, a consensus discussion was led by KMC, with the results described below.

    In addition to the consensus activities, two sections that had been features of prior consensus meetings underwent an update and synthesis of literature. The evidence related to natural history of PFP and patellofemoral osteoarthritis (OA) was described by JJS and KMC, while a recommendation on PROMs for use in PFP was completed by NJC, DBJ and JFE, based on the best available evidence.

    The following pages present the 4th Patellofemoral Pain Consensus Statement regarding terminology, definitions, clinical examination, natural history, patellofemoral OA and patient reported outcomes (PROMs). These statements represent the contemporary status of knowledge in the field of PFP and hence, will change over time. This document was developed for clinicians and researchers, to improve our comprehension of this problematic condition, and provide a guide for better and more consistent assessment and management. Additionally, gaps in current knowledge can be identified and provide a basis for future research directions.

    Terminology

    Two terms were proposed for the condition: (1) PFP and (2) patellofemoral arthropathy. PFP has been used as the preferred term over recent years, however, it does not take into account how non-painful joint conditions could be a precursor to pain development, does not include symptoms such as crepitus, and may increase a focus on the ‘pain’ aspect of the condition. The alternative term, patellofemoral arthropathy, was proposed, as part of the increasing recognition that PFP may be a symptom of joint disease. Focusing on the disease process (arthropathy) might not be appropriate because: (A) the linkage between disease process and pain presentation is not clear, (B) pain is the predominant symptom, and (C) it could shift the focus to imaging, rather than clinical outcomes.

    Statement 1. The term ‘patellofemoral pain’ is the preferred term, and is a synonym for other terms including: (1) PFP syndrome; (2) chondromalacia patella; (3) anterior knee pain and/or syndrome; and (4) runner's knee.

    Defining PFP

    Statement 2. The core criterion required to define PFP is pain around or behind the patella, which is aggravated by at least one activity that loads the patellofemoral joint during weight bearing on a flexed knee (eg, squatting, stair ambulation, jogging/running, hopping/jumping).

    Additional criteria (not essential):

    1. Crepitus or grinding sensation emanating from the patellofemoral joint during knee flexion movements

    2. Tenderness on patellar facet palpation

    3. Small effusion

    4. Pain on sitting, rising on sitting, or straightening the knee following sitting

    Statement 3. People with a history of dislocation, or who report perceptions of subluxation, should not be included in studies of PFP, unless the study is specifically evaluating these subgroups.

    Currently, such patients are considered to be a subgroup of people with patellofemoral disorders and/or pain, who may have distinct presentations, biomechanical risk factors and require different treatments approaches.

    Clinical examination of PFP

    Clinical examination is the cornerstone to diagnose PFP,16 ,17 but there is no definitive clinical test to diagnose PFP.18

    Statement 4. The best available test is anterior knee pain elicited during a squatting manoeuvre: PFP is evident in 80% of people who are positive on this test.18

    Additional tests (limited evidence):

     Tenderness on palpation of the patellar edges (PFP is evident in 71–75% of people with this finding.18

    Tests with limited diagnostic usefulness

    • Patellar grinding and apprehension tests (eg, Clarke's test) have low sensitivity and limited diagnostic accuracy for PFP.18 ,19

    • Knee range of motion and effusion.

    Natural history

    Incidence and prevalence of PFP

    Statement 5. PFP is common in young adolescents, with a prevalence of 7–28%,2 ,20 ,21 and incidence of 9.2%.20

    Few studies have evaluated prevalence or incidence in other populations, except in the military,4 where the annual incidence in men is 3.8% and in women is 6.5%, with a prevalence of 12% in men and 15% in women.4

    Specialisation in a single sport was associated with a relative risk (1.5: 95% CI: 1.0 to 2.2) of PFP incidence compared to multisport athletes.2

    Patellofemoral osteoarthritis

    Prevalence and impact of patellofemoral OA

    Statement 6. Patellofemoral OA is an under recognised yet important subgroup of knee OA.22 ,23

    Knee OA research has mainly focused on the tibiofemoral compartment, yet recent evidence suggests that the patellofemoral compartment is at least as commonly affected by OA.24–26 Depending on the source population and definition of OA (ie, radiographic or MRI) isolated patellofemoral OA is present in 11–24% of older individuals and occurs in combination with tibiofemoral OA in 4–40% of people. People with patellofemoral OA exhibit similar patterns of pain and functional limitation to those with PFP.27–31

    Risk factors/factors associated with patellofemoral OA

    Statement 7. A variety of factors may alter the mechanics of the patellofemoral joint and increase joint stress, potentially leading to OA.

    1. Abnormal patellofemoral joint alignment and trochlear morphology are associated with patellofemoral OA (both radiographic and MRI features). A recent systematic review32 concluded that there is strong evidence that patellofemoral OA is associated with both abnormal trochlear morphology and frontal plane knee alignment. There is also limited evidence (due to the lack of longitudinal studies) that malalignment in the sagittal (patella alta) and axial (lateral patellar displacement and tilt) planes are associated with patellofemoral OA. However, there remains a knowledge gap regarding optimal measures and thresholds to best predict patellofemoral OA.

    2. Muscle weakness: Quadriceps weakness is an important factor in patellofemoral OA. Quadriceps function, such as muscle size,33 strength34 ,35 and muscle force,36 is impaired in people with patellofemoral OA. Importantly, quadriceps weakness is a risk factor for patellofemoral OA.37 Weakness of muscle groups above the knee (involving the gluteii, often referred to as the ‘proximal muscles’) is well documented in young individuals with non-arthritic PFP.16 ,38–42 Emerging evidence suggests that those with patellofemoral OA may also demonstrate proximal muscle dysfunction compared to controls, including lower gluteus minimus and medius peak muscle force,43 and lower hip abductor strength.44 These studies found no differences in gluteus maximus peak muscle force43 or hip external rotator strength.44 In the absence of longitudinal studies, the potential for hip muscle weakness to increase the risk of patellofemoral OA remains unknown.

    3. Abnormal biomechanics: There is recent evidence that individuals with patellofemoral OA demonstrate abnormal biomechanics during gait.36 ,43 ,45–47 Fok et al36 reported that those with patellofemoral OA had lower knee extension moments, quadriceps forces and patellofemoral joint reaction forces during stair ascent and descent. In contrast to these findings, Pohl et al44 reported that pelvis, hip and knee kinematics were not different between people with patellofemoral OA and controls. In the only longitudinal study to date, Teng et al48 found that peak knee flexion moment and flexion moment impulse at baseline lead to progression of patellofemoral cartilage damage over 2 years.

    Statement 8. Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) increases the risk of patellofemoral OA.

    There is radiographic and MRI evidence of patellofemoral OA following ACLR,49–57 which appears to be independent of hamstring tendon or bone-patellar-bone autograft. While further longitudinal studies are required to elucidate the mechanisms underpinning patellofemoral OA following ACLR, it may be related to altered biomechanics and concomitant chondral damage.56 ,58 Notably, patellofemoral OA following ACLR is associated with worse symptoms and function57 and deteriorating symptoms.59

    Relationship between structure and pain

    Statement 9. The relationship between abnormal joint structure and pain is imprecise. Patellofemoral pathology is traditionally considered to occur in the lateral compartment, which appears inconsistent with cartilage damage and bone marrow lesions (BMLs) on MRI (two hallmark features of OA on MRI) presenting in the medial and lateral patellofemoral joint.60 ,61 An interesting finding was that PFP was only present with lateral patellofemoral joint damage and with concomitant medial and lateral structural damage, but not when there was only medial joint damage.61 In a series of studies, Sharma et al62 found that PFJ cartilage damage and BMLs were associated with prevalent frequent knee symptoms and incident persistent symptoms over 5 years and that worsening of preradiographic patelofemoral damage was associated with persistent knee symptoms.63

    Statement 10. The infrapatellar fat pad is an intracapsular and extrasynovial tissue that is highly innervated and a potential cause of PFP.

    The role of the fat pad in the patellofemoral OA disease process remains unclear. In a cohort of people with patellofemoral OA there was greater fat pad volume compared to controls, and greater fat pad volume was associated with greater knee pain severity.64 In other cohorts of people with and without OA, greater fat pad size was associated with greater medial and lateral tibial and patellar cartilage volume,65 and predicted lower knee pain at follow-up.66

    Treatment of patellofemoral OA

    Statement 11. Clinical features of patellofemoral OA may differ from tibiofemoral OA.

    It is possible that in order to target effective rehabilitation treatments for those with patellofemoral OA, we need to recognise the clinical findings that identify and discriminate them from tibiofemoral OA. Schiphof et al67 reported that the presence of crepitus in the knee and history of patellar pain were significantly associated with patellofemoral joint OA (but not tibiofemoral joint OA) in women. Other studies reported poor diagnostic ability of a variety of clinical examination findings self-reported knee pain location and with activities to discriminate those with patellofemoral OA from those with tibiofemoral OA.34 ,68 This is an area requiring further investigation, as highlighted in the Felson editorial.10

    Statement 12. A combined intervention69 (ie, exercise therapy, education, manual therapy and taping) or patellofemoral bracing70 may improve outcomes for people with patellofemoral OA.

    Patellofemoral bracing may improve patellofemoral kinematics and knee pain and shrink BMLs in those with patellofemoral OA.70 ,71 ,72 The only other study on patellofemoral bracing found a small but non-significant effect on knee pain.73

    Patient-reported outcome measures

    PROMs are used by researchers and clinicians to follow the course of PFP and evaluate treatment outcomes. Typically administered as questionnaires, PROMs measure the patient's own perspective of their PFP and treatment, without interpretation of their response by another individual. This minimises observer bias, and captures aspects of PFP that are likely to be important to the patient.

    Statement 13. Researchers should use a standard set of PROMs for PFP and OA to facilitate future comparisons and pooling of data.

    These should encompass three core clinical constructs: pain, function and global assessment.74 Researchers may also choose to evaluate quality of life and physical activity (optional constructs). Specific PROMs for each construct will be recommended in an upcoming paper, based on a Delphi exercise.

    It should be noted that few PROMs have been developed specifically for PFP, raising the possibility that PROMs commonly used in research to date may lack content validity for this patient population.

    Future directions

    The reporting in studies of patients with PFP can limit their knowledge translation and as a result, a Delphi exercise is underway, to determine the minimum design and reporting standards for PFP. The 5th International Patellofemoral Pain Research Retreat, will be held in Brisbane, Australia in July, 2017.

    Acknowledgments

    All participants contributing to the 4th International Patellofemoral Pain Research Retreat.

    References

    1. ↵
      1. Myer GD,
      2. Ford KR,
      3. Barber Foss KD, et al
      . The incidence and potential pathomechanics of patellofemoral pain in female athletes. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2010;25:700–7. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2010.04.001
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    2. ↵
      1. Hall R,
      2. Barber Foss K,
      3. Hewett TE, et al
      . Sport specialization's association with an increased risk of developing anterior knee pain in adolescent female athletes. J Sport Rehabil 2015;24:31–5. doi:10.1123/jsr.2013-0101
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    3. ↵
      1. Rathleff MS,
      2. Skuldbøl SK,
      3. Rasch MNB, et al
      . Care-seeking behaviour of adolescents with knee pain: a population-based study among 504 adolescents. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2013;14:225. doi:10.1186/1471-2474-14-225
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    4. ↵
      1. Boling M,
      2. Padua D,
      3. Marshall S, et al
      . Gender differences in the incidence and prevalence of patellofemoral pain syndrome. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2010;20:725–30. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0838.2009.00996.x
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    5. ↵
      1. Kannus P,
      2. Aho H,
      3. Jarvinen M, et al
      . Computerised recording of visits to an outpatient sports clinic. Am J Sports Med 1987;15:79–85. doi:10.1177/036354658701500112
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    6. ↵
      1. Taunton JE,
      2. Ryan MB,
      3. Clement DB, et al
      . A retrospective case-control analysis of 2002 running injuries. Br J Sports Med 2002;36:95–101. doi:10.1136/bjsm.36.2.95
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    7. ↵
      1. Collins NJ,
      2. Bierma-Zeinstra SM,
      3. Crossley KM, et al
      . Prognostic factors for patellofemoral pain: A multicentre observational analysis. Br J Sports Med 2013;47:227–33. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2012-091696
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    8. ↵
      1. Nimon G,
      2. Murray D,
      3. Sandow M, et al
      . Natural history of anterior knee pain: a 14- to 20-year follow-up of nonoperative management. J Pediatr Orthop 1998;18:118–22.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    9. ↵
      1. Lankhorst NE,
      2. Van Middelkoop M,
      3. KM C, et al
      . Factors that predict a poor outcome 5–8 years after the diagnosis of patellofemoral pain: a multicentre observational analysis. Br J Sports Med 2016;50:8816. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2015-094664
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    10. ↵
      1. Felson DT
      . Challenges of identifying and treating patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Br J Sports Med 2016;50:8323.
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    11. ↵
      1. Rathleff MS
      . Patellofemoral pain during adolescence: Much more prevalent than appreciated. Br J Sports Med 2016;50:83132.
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    12. ↵
      1. Witvrouw E,
      2. Callaghan MJ,
      3. Stefanik JJ, et al
      . Patellofemoral pain: Consensus statement from the 3rd International Patellofemoral Pain Research Retreat held in Vancouver, September 2013. Br J Sports Med 2014;48:411–14. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2014-093450
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    13. ↵
      1. Powers CM,
      2. Bolgla LA,
      3. Callaghan MJ, et al
      . Patellofemoral pain: proximal, distal, and local factors, 2nd International Research Retreat. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2012;42:A1–54. doi:10.2519/jospt.2012.0301
      OpenUrlPubMed
    14. ↵
      1. Davis IS,
      2. Powers CM
      . Patellofemoral pain syndrome: proximal, distal, and local factors, an international retreat, April 30-May 2, 2009, Fells Point, Baltimore, MD. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2010;40:A1–16. doi:10.2519/jospt.2010.0302
      OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
    15. ↵
      1. Crossley KM,
      2. van Middelkoop M,
      3. Callaghan MK, et al
      . 2016 patellofemoral pain consensus statement from the 4th International Patellofemoral Pain Research Retreat, Manchester Part 2: Recommended physical interventions (exercise, taping, bracing, foot orthoses and combined interventions). Br J Sports Med 2016;50:84452.
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    16. ↵
      1. Crossley KM,
      2. Cook JL,
      3. Cowan SM, et al
      . Anterior knee pain. In: Brukner PD, Bahr R, Blair S, et al. Brukner and Khan's Clinical Sports Medicine. Sydney, McGraw Hill: 2012:684–714.
    17. ↵
      1. Crossley KM,
      2. Callaghan M,
      3. van Linschoten R
      . Patellofemoral pain: practie pointer. BMJ 2015;351:h3939. doi:10.1136/bmj.h3939
      OpenUrlFREE Full Text
    18. ↵
      1. Nunes GS,
      2. Stapait EL,
      3. Kirsten MH, et al
      . Clinical test for diagnosis of patellofemoral pain syndrome: Systematic review with meta-analysis. Phys Ther Sport 2013;14:54–9. doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2012.11.003
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    19. ↵
      1. Doberstein ST,
      2. Romeyn RL,
      3. Reineke DM
      . The diagnostic value of the Clarke sign in assessing chondromalacia patella. J Athl Train 2008;43:190–6. doi:10.4085/1062-6050-43.2.190
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    20. ↵
      1. Myer GD,
      2. Ford KR,
      3. Di Stasi SL, et al
      . High knee abduction moments are common risk factors for patellofemoral pain (PFP) and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury in girls: Is PFP itself a predictor for subsequent ACL injury? Br J Sports Med 2015;49:118–22. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2013-092536
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    21. ↵
      1. Rathleff MS,
      2. Roos EM,
      3. Olesen JL, et al
      . Exercise during school hours when added to patient education improves outcome for 2 years in adolescent patellofemoral pain: a cluster randomised trial. Br J Sports Med 2015;49:406–12. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2014-093929
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    22. ↵
      1. Hinman RS,
      2. Crossley KM
      . Patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis: an important subgroup of knee osteoarthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2007;46:1057–62. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kem114
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    23. ↵
      1. Crossley KM,
      2. Hinman RS
      . The patellofemoral joint: the forgotten joint in knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 2011;19:765–7. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2011.05.005
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    24. ↵
      1. Duncan RC,
      2. Hay EM,
      3. Saklatvala J, et al
      . Prevalence of radiographic osteoarthritis—it all depends on your point of view. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2006;45:757–60. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kei270
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    25. ↵
      1. McAlindon TE,
      2. Snow S,
      3. Cooper C, et al
      . Radiographic patterns of osteoarthritis of the knee joint in the community: the importance of the patellofemoral joint. Ann Rheum Dis 1992;51:844–9. doi:10.1136/ard.51.7.844
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    26. ↵
      1. Stefanik JJ,
      2. Niu J,
      3. Gross KD, et al
      . Using magnetic resonance imaging to determine the compartmental prevalence of knee joint structural damage. Osteoarthr Cartil 2013;21:695–9. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2013.02.003
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    27. ↵
      1. Duncan R,
      2. Peat G,
      3. Thomas E, et al
      . How do pain and function vary with compartmental distribution and severity of radiographic knee osteoarthritis? Rheumatology (Oxford) 2008;47:1704–7. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/ken339
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    28. ↵
      1. Hunter DJ,
      2. March L,
      3. Sambrook PN
      . The association of cartilage volume with knee pain. Osteoarthr Cartil 2003;11:725–9. doi:10.1016/S1063-4584(03)00160-2
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    29. ↵
      1. Kornaat PR,
      2. Bloem JL,
      3. Ceulemans RY, et al
      . Osteoarthritis of the knee: association between clinical features and MR imaging findings. Radiology 2006;239: 811–17. doi:10.1148/radiol.2393050253
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    30. ↵
      1. Szebenyi B,
      2. Hollander AP,
      3. Dieppe P, et al
      . Associations between pain, function, and radiographic features in osteoarthritis of the knee. Arthritis Rheum 2006;54:230–5. doi:10.1002/art.21534
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    31. ↵
      1. Duncan R,
      2. Peat G,
      3. Thomas E, et al
      . Does isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis matter? Osteoarthr Cartil 2009;17:1151–5. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2009.03.016
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    32. ↵
      1. Macri EM,
      2. Stefanik JJ,
      3. Khan KM, et al
      . Is tibiofemoral or patellofemoral alignment or trochlear morphology associated with patellofemoral osteoarthritis? A systematic review. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2016. 2016 Jan 27. doi: 10.1002/acr.22842. [Epub ahead of print]doi:10.1002/acr.22842
    33. ↵
      1. Hart HF,
      2. Ackland DC,
      3. Pandy MG, et al
      . Quadriceps volumes are reduced in people with patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 2012;20: 863–8. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2012.04.009
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    34. ↵
      1. Peat G,
      2. Duncan RC,
      3. Wood LRJ, et al
      . Clinical features of symptomatic patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis. Arthritis Res Ther 2012;14:R63. doi:10.1186/ar3779
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    35. ↵
      1. Farrokhi S,
      2. Piva SR,
      3. Gil AB, et al
      . Association of severity of coexisting patellofemoral disease with increased impairments and functional limitations in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2013;65:544–51. doi:10.1002/acr.21866
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    36. ↵
      1. Fok LA,
      2. Schache AG,
      3. Crossley KM, et al
      . Patellofemoral joint loading during stair ambulation in people with patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2013;65:2059–69. doi:10.1002/art.38025
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    37. ↵
      1. Amin S,
      2. Baker K,
      3. Niu J, et al
      . Quadriceps strength and the risk of cartilage loss and symptom progression in knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2009;60:189–98. doi:10.1002/art.24182
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    38. ↵
      1. Nakagawa TH,
      2. Moriya ÉT,
      3. Maciel CD, et al
      . Frontal plane biomechanics in males and females with and without patellofemoral pain. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2012;44:1747–55. doi:10.1249/MSS.0b013e318256903a
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    39. ↵
      1. Nakagawa TH,
      2. Moriya ET,
      3. Maciel CD, et al
      . Trunk, pelvis, hip, and knee kinematics, hip strength, and gluteal muscle activation during a single-leg squat in males and females with and without patellofemoral pain syndrome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2012;42:491–501. doi:10.2519/jospt.2012.3987
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    40. ↵
      1. Souza RB,
      2. Powers CM
      . Differences in hip kinematics, muscle strength, and muscle activation between subjects with and without patellofemoral pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2009;39:12–19. doi:10.2519/jospt.2009.2885
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    41. ↵
      1. Dierks TA,
      2. Manal KT,
      3. Hamill J, et al
      . Proximal and distal influences on hip and knee kinematics in runners with patellofemoral pain during a prolonged run. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2008;38:448–56. doi:10.2519/jospt.2008.2490
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    42. ↵
      1. Willson JD,
      2. Davis IS
      . Lower extremity mechanics of females with and without patellofemoral pain across activities with progressively greater task demands. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2008;23:203–11. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2007.08.025
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    43. ↵
      1. Crossley KM,
      2. Dorn TW,
      3. Ozturk H, et al
      . Altered hip muscle forces during gait in people with patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 2012;20: 1243–9. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2012.07.011
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    44. ↵
      1. Pohl MB,
      2. Patel C,
      3. Wiley JP, et al
      . Gait biomechanics and hip muscular strength in patients with patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Gait Posture 2013;37:440–4. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.08.017
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    45. ↵
      1. Farrokhi S,
      2. O'Connell M,
      3. Fitzgerald GK
      . Altered gait biomechanics and increased knee-specific impairments in patients with coexisting tibiofemoral and patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Gait Posture 2015;41:81–5. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2014.08.014
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    46. ↵
      1. Stefanik JJ,
      2. Guermazi A,
      3. Zhu Y, et al
      . Quadriceps weakness, patella alta, and structural features of patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2011;63:1391–7. doi:10.1002/acr.20528
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    47. ↵
      1. Teng HL,
      2. MacLeod TD,
      3. Kumar D, et al
      . Individuals with isolated patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis exhibit higher mechanical loading at the knee during the second half of the stance phase. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2015;30:383–90. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2015.02.008
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    48. ↵
      1. Teng HL,
      2. MacLeod TD,
      3. Link TM, et al
      . Higher knee flexion moment during the second half of the stance phase of gait is associated with magnetic resonance imaging progression of patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2015;45:656–64. doi:10.2519/jospt.2015.5859
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    49. ↵
      1. Øiestad BE,
      2. Holm I,
      3. Engebretsen L, et al
      . The prevalence of patellofemoral osteoarthritis 12 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2013;21:942–9. doi:10.1007/s00167-012-2161-9
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    50. ↵
      1. Keays SL,
      2. Newcombe PA,
      3. Bullock-Saxton JE, et al
      . Factors involved in the development of osteoarthritis after anterior curciate ligament surgery. Am J Sports Med 2010;38:455–63. doi:10.1177/0363546509350914
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    51. ↵
      1. Keays SL,
      2. Bullock-Saxton JE,
      3. Keays AC, et al
      . A 6-year follow-up of the effect of graft site on strength, stability, range of motion, function, and joint degeneration after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: Patellar tendon versus semitendinosus and gracilis tendon graft. Am J Sports Med 2007;35:729–39. doi:10.1177/0363546506298277
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    52. ↵
      1. Frobell RB,
      2. Le Graverand MP,
      3. Buck R, et al
      . The acutely ACL injured knee assessed by MRI: changes in joint fluid, bone marrow lesions, and cartilage during the first year. Osteoarthr Cartil 2009;17:161–7. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2008.06.020
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    53. ↵
      1. Neuman P,
      2. Kostogiannis I,
      3. Fridén T, et al
      . Patellofemoral osteoarthritis 15 years after anterior cruciate ligament injury—a prospective cohort study. Osteoarthr Cartil 2009;17:284–90. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2008.07.005
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    54. ↵
      1. Järvelä T,
      2. Paakkala T,
      3. Kännus P, et al
      . The incidence of patellofemoral osteoarthritis and associated findings 7 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction with a bone-patellar tendon-bone autograft. Am J Sports Med 2001;29:18–24.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    55. ↵
      1. Culvenor AG,
      2. Collins NJ,
      3. Guermazi A, et al
      . Early knee osteoarthritis is evident one year following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: A magnetic resonance imaging evaluation. Arthritis and Rheumatology 2015;67:946–55. doi:10.1002/art.39005
      OpenUrlCrossRef
    56. ↵
      1. Culvenor AG,
      2. Cook JL,
      3. Collins NJ, et al
      . Is patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis an under-recognised outcome of anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? A narrative literature review. Br J Sports Med 2013;47:66–73. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2012-091490
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    57. ↵
      1. Culvenor AG,
      2. Lai CCH,
      3. Gabbe BJ, et al
      . Patellofemoral osteoarthritis is prevalent and associated with worse symptoms and function after hamstring tendon autograft ACL reconstruction. Br J Sports Med 2014;48:435–9. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2013-092975
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    58. ↵
      1. Culvenor AG,
      2. Schache AG,
      3. Vicenzino B, et al
      . Are knee biomechanics different in those with and without patellofemoral osteoarthritis after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction? Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2014;66:1566–70. doi:10.1002/acr.22313
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    59. ↵
      1. Culvenor AG,
      2. Collins NJ,
      3. Guermazi A, et al
      . Early patellofemoral osteoarthritis features 1 year after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: symptoms and quality of life at 3 years. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2015. 2015 Oct 16. doi: 10.1002/acr.22761. [Epub ahead of print]doi:10.1002/acr.22761
    60. ↵
      1. Gross KD,
      2. Niu J,
      3. Stefanik JJ, et al
      . Breaking the Law of Valgus: the surprising and unexplained prevalence of medial patellofemoral cartilage damage. Ann Rheum Dis 2012;71:1827–32. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2011-200606
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    61. ↵
      1. Stefanik JJ,
      2. Gross KD,
      3. Guermazi A, et al
      . The relation of MRI-detected structural damage in the medial and lateral patellofemoral joint to knee pain: the Multicenter and Framingham Osteoarthritis Studies. Osteoarthr Cartil 2015;23:565–70. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2014.12.023
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    62. ↵
      1. Sharma L,
      2. Chmiel JS,
      3. Almagor O, et al
      . Significance of preradiographic magnetic resonance imaging lesions in persons at increased risk of knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 2014;66:1811–19. doi:10.1002/art.38611
      OpenUrl
    63. ↵
      1. Sharma L,
      2. Nevitt M,
      3. Hochberg MC, et al
      . Clinical significance of worsening versus stable predaiographic MRI lesions in a cohort study of persons at higher risk or knee osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis; Published Online First: 14 Oct 2015 doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2015-208129
    64. ↵
      1. Cowan SM,
      2. Hart HF,
      3. Warden SJ, et al
      . Infrapatellar fat pad volume is greater in individuals with patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis and associated with pain. Rheumatol Int 2015;35:1439–42. doi:10.1007/s00296-015-3250-0
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    65. ↵
      1. Cai J,
      2. Xu J,
      3. Wang K, et al
      . Association between infrapatellar fat pad volume and knee structural changes in patients with knee osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol 2015;42:1878–84. doi:10.3899/jrheum.150175
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    66. ↵
      1. Teichtahl AJ,
      2. Wulidasari E,
      3. Brady SR, et al
      . A large infrapatellar fat pad protects against knee pain and lateral tibial cartilage volume loss. Arthritis Res Ther 2015;17:318. doi:10.1186/s13075-015-0831-y
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    67. ↵
      1. Schiphof D,
      2. van Middelkoop M,
      3. de Klerk BM, et al
      . Crepitus is a first indication of patellofemoral osteoarthritis (and not of tibiofemoral osteoarthritis). Osteoarthr Cartil 2014;22:631–8. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2014.02.008
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    68. ↵
      1. Stefanik JJ,
      2. Neogi T,
      3. Niu J, et al
      . The diagnostic performance of anterior knee pain and activity-related pain in identifying knees with structural damage in the patellofemoral joint: the multicenter osteoarthritis study. J Rheumatol 2014;41:1695–702. doi:10.3899/jrheum.131555
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    69. ↵
      1. Crossley KM,
      2. Vicenzino B,
      3. Lentzos J, et al
      . Exercise, education, manual-therapy and taping compared to education for patellofemoral osteoarthritis: a blinded, randomised clinical trial. Osteoarthr Cartil 2015;23:1457–64. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2015.04.024
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    70. ↵
      1. Callaghan MJ,
      2. Parkes MJ,
      3. Hutchinson CE, et al
      . A randomised trial of a brace for patellofemoral osteoarthritis targeting knee pain and bone marrow lesions. Ann Rheum Dis 2015;74:1164–70. doi:10.1136/annrheumdis-2014-206376
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    71. ↵
      1. McWalter EJ,
      2. Hunter DJ,
      3. Harvey WF, et al
      . The effect of a patellar brace on three-dimensional patellar kinematics in patients with lateral patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 2011;19:801–8. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2011.03.003
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    72. ↵
      1. Felson DT,
      2. Parkes MJ,
      3. Marjonovic EJ, et al
      . Bone Marrow Lesions in Osteoarthritis change in 6-12 weeks. Osteoarthr Cartil 2012;20: 1514–18. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2012.08.020
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    73. ↵
      1. Hunter DJ,
      2. Harvey W,
      3. Gross KD, et al
      . A randomized trial of patellofemoral bracing for treatment of patellofemoral osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 2011;19:792–800. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2010.12.010
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
    74. ↵
      1. McAlindon TE,
      2. Driban JB,
      3. Henrotin Y, et al
      . OARSI Clinical Trials Recommendations: Design, conduct, and reporting of clinical trials for knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 2015;23:747–60. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2015.03.005
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    View Abstract

    Footnotes

    • Twitter Follow Kay Crossley: @kaymcrossley, Joshua Stefanik: @patellaprof, Natalie Collins: @natj_collins, Irene Davis: @IreneSDavis, Bill Vicenzino: @Bill_Vicenzino, David Bazett-Jones: @DrBazettJones, Jean-Francois Esculier: @JFEsculier, Dylan Morrisey: @DrDylanM

    • Contributors KMC, CMP, ISD, JMcC conceived the idea of the consensus development. All authors contributed to discussion and editing of the paper. JJS and KMC updated the patellofemoral OA section, NJC, DMB-J and J-FE updated the PROM section. MJC and JS contributed information regarding the meeting. All authors contributed to write up and approved the final manuscript.

    • Funding BJSM paid for international travel flights for one keynote speaker to attend the consensus meeting.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    Linked Articles