IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0190892.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Incidence and prevalence of patellofemoral pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin E Smith
  • James Selfe
  • Damian Thacker
  • Paul Hendrick
  • Marcus Bateman
  • Fiona Moffatt
  • Michael Skovdal Rathleff
  • Toby O Smith
  • Pip Logan

Abstract

Background: Patellofemoral pain is considered one of the most common forms of knee pain, affecting adults, adolescents, and physically active populations. Inconsistencies in reported incidence and prevalence exist and in relation to the allocation of healthcare and research funding, there is a clear need to accurately understand the epidemiology of patellofemoral pain. Methods: An electronic database search was conducted, as well as grey literature databases, from inception to June 2017. Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data and appraised methodological quality. If heterogeneous, data were analysed descriptively. Where studies were homogeneous, data were pooled through a meta-analysis. Results: 23 studies were included. Annual prevalence for patellofemoral pain in the general population was reported as 22.7%, and adolescents as 28.9%. Incidence rates in military recruits ranged from 9.7–571.4/1,000 person-years, amateur runners in the general population at 1080.5/1,000 person-years and adolescents amateur athletes 5.1%–14.9% over 1 season. One study reported point prevalence within military populations as 13.5%. Conclusion: This review demonstrates high incidence and prevalence levels for patellofemoral pain. Within the context of this, and poor long term prognosis and high disability levels, PFP should be an urgent research priority. PROSPERO registration: CRD42016038870

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin E Smith & James Selfe & Damian Thacker & Paul Hendrick & Marcus Bateman & Fiona Moffatt & Michael Skovdal Rathleff & Toby O Smith & Pip Logan, 2018. "Incidence and prevalence of patellofemoral pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0190892
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190892
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0190892
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0190892&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0190892?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0190892. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.