Patellar Apprehension Is Reduced in Most but Not All Patients After Successful Patellar Stabilization
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: The clinical sign of patellar laxity and the associated symptom of apprehension are mainstays of the physical examination of patellofemoral instability. The apprehension test is widely used as a diagnostic tool and also as an outcome following patellofemoral stabilization surgery. Despite widespread use, the validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the apprehension test have not been established. Purpose: The primary purpose was to evaluate patellar apprehension in patients with recurrent patellofemoral instability to determine if the apprehension test is valid, reliable, and responsive to change after medial patellofemoral ligament (MPFL) reconstruction. The secondary purposes were to concurrently validate patient-rated to surgeon-rated apprehension and to correlate patient-rated apprehension with pathoanatomic characteristics and quality-of-life scores. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 89 patients underwent an MPFL reconstruction and were assessed preoperatively and at 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. The patellar apprehension test was performed in neutral extension and 30° of knee flexion. Patient- and surgeon-rated apprehension were graded on a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS), and the quality of the apprehension symptoms were recorded. Risk factors for patellofemoral instability were documented, and the Banff Patellofemoral Instability Score 2.0 (BPII 2.0) was used to measure disease-specific quality of life. Results: The patient-rated and surgeon-rated apprehension VAS scores were statistically significantly reduced from pre- to postoperatively ( P < .001, large effect size) for the neutral extension and 30° of flexion apprehension tests. Postoperatively, over 56% of patients reported a negative apprehension test. Up to 15.7% of patients with positive preoperative apprehension did not demonstrate a reduction postoperatively. Patients consistently graded their apprehension symptoms higher in both quantity and quality than the surgeon. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC [2, k]) assessing the preoperative patient and surgeon VAS scores revealed moderate interrater reliability in neutral extension ( r = 0.60) and weak interrater reliability in 30° of flexion ( r = 0.42). The postoperative ICC (2, k) demonstrated strong interrater reliability for both neutral extension ( r = 0.74) and 30° of flexion ( r = 0.73). The symptoms of apprehension (physical, emotional, and/or physiological) decreased substantially after surgery. The correlation of postoperative patient-rated apprehension VAS and BPII 2.0 scores demonstrated that less residual patellar apprehension was associated with higher BPII scores in neutral extension ( r = −0.35, P = .001). There were no statistically significant correlations revealed between the patient-rated postoperative apprehension VAS and pathoanatomic risk factors. BPII 2.0 scores improved pre- to postoperatively from a mean of 27.6 (SD, 15.7) to 74.3 (SD, 18.3). Three patients (3.4%) sustained a patellar dislocation postoperatively. Conclusion: The patellar apprehension test demonstrated strong validity and responsiveness to change. Interrater reliability ranged from weak to strong. There was a statistically significant reduction in apprehension after patellofemoral stabilization in the majority of patients. Patients graded their apprehension symptoms significantly higher in both quantity and quality than the surgeon. Persistent patellar apprehension after stabilization was correlated with lower quality-of-life scores. No relationship could be found between persistent apprehension and patellofemoral risk factors. These results suggest that use of the apprehension tests as an outcome is inappropriate until further validation is performed.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».