4.6 Review

The psychological features of patellofemoral pain: a systematic review

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE
Volume 51, Issue 9, Pages 732-742

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bjsports-2016-096705

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is prevalent in adolescence and adulthood and often persists. In contrast to other persistent musculoskeletal conditions, for which non-physical, psychological features are implicated, PFP remains largely conceptualised in mechanical terms. Aims To (1) identify whether the psychological characteristics of individuals with PFP differs from asymptomatic controls and (2) evaluate the correlations between psychological characteristics and PFP severity. Study design Systematic review Methods A systematic review of the literature was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. The Epidemiological Appraisal Instrument was used to evaluate quality. Studies measuring psychological constructs with patient-reported measures were included. Standardised mean differences were calculated and supported by narrative synthesis. Results Twenty-five studies were eligible. Quality results ranged from 28.3% to 61.7%. Psychological constructs were reported under four groupings: mental health, cognitive factors, behavioural factors and other factors. There is limited evidence of mental health and cognitive differences in some individuals with PFP. Features demonstrating linear correlations with pain and physical function included anxiety/depression, catastrophising, praying and hoping and pain-related fear. Conclusions Anxiety, depression, catastrophising and fear of movement may be elevated in individuals with PFP and correlate with pain and reduced physical function. These results derive from a limited number of studies. Future research should aim to evaluate if and how psychological factors contribute to PFP. Clinical relevance Patients are likely to benefit from clinician vigilance to the presence of psychological factors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available