Meta-Analysis
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2015.
World J Meta-Anal. Apr 26, 2015; 3(2): 118-124
Published online Apr 26, 2015. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v3.i2.118
Table 1 Characteristics of the nine studies examining the effects of hip strengthening exercises on pain and function in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome
Ref.Subject informationSubject mean age (min-max)Hip region targetedOutcome measuredTime to follow-up (mo)Number of exercise sessionsExercise duration (wk)PEDro quality score (0-11)
Dolak et al[12]33 women25.5PosterolateralPain VAS and LEFS0, 11, 211247
(16-35)
Fukuda et al[14]41 women25PosterolateralNPRS, Kujala AKPS, LEFS01249
(20-40)
Fukuda et al[13]49 women22.5PosterolateralNPRS, Kujala AKPS, LEFS3, 6, 121249
(20-40)
Herrington et al[15]30 men26.9GeneralPain VAS, Kujala AKPS01869
(18-35)
Ismail et al[16]32 (9 men, 23 women)21PosterolateralPain VAS, Kujala AKPS01868
(18-30)
Khayambashi et al[17]36 (18 men, 18 women)27.8PosterolateralPain VAS, Womac0, 62487
(12-44)
Nakagawa et al[18]14 (4 men, 10 women)23.6PosterolateralPain VAS030610
(17-40)
van Linschoten et al[19]131 (47 men, 84 women)24GeneralPain VAS, Kujala AKPS0, 984127
(14-40)
Witvrouw et al[20]60 (20 men, 40 women)20.3GeneralPain VAS, Kujala AKPS3, 6011558
(14-33)
Table 2 Summary of subgroup meta-analyses and meta-regression analyses examining potential moderator variables that might explain the variation in effect size among studies
Moderator variableComparison (or slope for continuous variables)P value
Outcome typeFunction (n = 8, ES = 0.92) vs Pain (n = 9, ES = 0.95)0.95
Time of follow-upImmediate (n = 7, ES = 0.79) vs Long term (n = 4, ES = 1.111)0.44
Control group typeKnee extensor strengthening only (n = 6, ES = 1.15) vs Knee extensor strengthening plus other (n = 3, ES = 0.56)0.24
Hip region targeted with exerciseGeneral hip (n = 3, ES = 0.60) vs Posterolateral hip (n = 6, ES = 1.13)0.23
Number of exercise sessions-0.009/session0.38
Number of weeks of exercise-0.066/wk0.48