髌股疼痛:症状还是疾病?

Q1 Medicine Joints Pub Date : 2018-07-25 DOI:10.1055/s-0038-1667195
Giuseppe Milano
{"title":"髌股疼痛:症状还是疾病?","authors":"Giuseppe Milano","doi":"10.1055/s-0038-1667195","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Two clinical studies published in this issue of Joints deal with the complex issueofpatellofemoral pain treatment. Enea et al1 report the results obtained using distalization and medialization of the tibial tuberosity, a surgical treatment for potential patellar instability (PPI) associated with a particularly “challenging” predisposing factor, namely, the patella alta. The index group (PPI group), consisting of patients with pain but no episodes of frank patellar instability, was compared with a group of patients reporting pain and objective patellar instability. The authors found that the treatment significantly reduced pain and improved knee function in both groups. However, the improvement in subjective instability was significantly more marked in the patients with PPI. In short, the proposed treatment was found to be particularly effective in the treatment of patients with PPI and patellofemoral pain. The article by Uboldi et al,2 concerns a prospective randomized trial on the efficacy of an elastomeric knee brace used in the treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) in adjunct to a specifically developed rehabilitation program. Function was found to be significantly improved both in the study group and in the controls (who only received rehabilitation); however, use of the knee brace was associated with significantly reduced pain. Patellofemoral pain is, undoubtedly, a clinical problem with a high social and economic impact, given that it affects a young and active section of the population. Indeed, in addition to rehabilitation treatment costs, it is also necessary to consider the costs related to reduced productivity, due to days off work, and reduced work efficiency. Undoubtedly, surgery, when indicated, is effective in resolving symptoms. However, in most cases, the pain in PFPS is disabling, and surgical treatment, however adequately it corrects the factors underlying the clinical presentation, is rather invasive and not always predictable in terms of late sequelae. There have been few rigorous analyses of exercise therapy for the treatment of PFPS. A Cochrane review3 has highlighted the effectiveness of rehabilitation treatment in helping to reduce knee pain and function in patients with PFPS. Tan et al4 showed that annual direct medical costs are higher in patients receiving rehabilitation treatment compared with those not receiving treatment, although the latter generate higher social costs, in particular, deriving from loss of productivity and work efficiency. Overall, therefore, rehabilitation treatment of PFPS has a favorable cost-effectiveness ratio. But what arewe treating whenwe treat PFPS? A symptom or a disease? I certainly have no intention of wading into the complex debate regarding the nomenclature and classification of all those clinical situations in which patellofemoral pain, or anterior knee pain as it may more generally be defined, can be recognized as a component. However, it is certainly true that patellofemoral pain belongs to a category of chronic osteoarticular pain that, over the years, has been the focus of a proliferation of therapeutic approaches aimed primarily at treating the symptom rather than its cause, thereby interpreting pain as a disease per se, rather than a sign of a problem. I am thinking, in particular, of lower back pain, a clinical condition that nowadays often seems to be dealt independently of its underlying organic cause, and that has attracted considerable attention from pain therapists aiming to address chronic pain in a multidisciplinary framework in which certain neuropathological mechanisms underlying pain, such as central sensitization, cortical reorganization, neuroimmune dysregulation, and sympathetic nervous system upregulation, are seen as possible treatment targets. Even the biopsychosocial approach has been introduced into the multimodal management of chronic low back pain. A Medline search using the terms “biopsychosocial & low back pain” will identify as many as 250 articles that approach the problem of low back pain from a sociocultural perspective. Today, however, we can only wonder what became of the “bio” part of chronic pain treatment,5 while fortunately, or unfortunately, use of the biopsychosocial approach in the field of patellofemoral pain is limited to a single study.6 We must certainly avoid accepting, uncritically, the idea that “painequalsdamage”; afterall,werethis thecase, itwould be impossible tounderstandwhychronicpain isnotconstantly","PeriodicalId":37852,"journal":{"name":"Joints","volume":"6 2","pages":"73-74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/s-0038-1667195","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patellofemoral Pain: Symptom or Disease?\",\"authors\":\"Giuseppe Milano\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/s-0038-1667195\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Two clinical studies published in this issue of Joints deal with the complex issueofpatellofemoral pain treatment. Enea et al1 report the results obtained using distalization and medialization of the tibial tuberosity, a surgical treatment for potential patellar instability (PPI) associated with a particularly “challenging” predisposing factor, namely, the patella alta. The index group (PPI group), consisting of patients with pain but no episodes of frank patellar instability, was compared with a group of patients reporting pain and objective patellar instability. The authors found that the treatment significantly reduced pain and improved knee function in both groups. However, the improvement in subjective instability was significantly more marked in the patients with PPI. In short, the proposed treatment was found to be particularly effective in the treatment of patients with PPI and patellofemoral pain. The article by Uboldi et al,2 concerns a prospective randomized trial on the efficacy of an elastomeric knee brace used in the treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) in adjunct to a specifically developed rehabilitation program. Function was found to be significantly improved both in the study group and in the controls (who only received rehabilitation); however, use of the knee brace was associated with significantly reduced pain. Patellofemoral pain is, undoubtedly, a clinical problem with a high social and economic impact, given that it affects a young and active section of the population. Indeed, in addition to rehabilitation treatment costs, it is also necessary to consider the costs related to reduced productivity, due to days off work, and reduced work efficiency. Undoubtedly, surgery, when indicated, is effective in resolving symptoms. However, in most cases, the pain in PFPS is disabling, and surgical treatment, however adequately it corrects the factors underlying the clinical presentation, is rather invasive and not always predictable in terms of late sequelae. There have been few rigorous analyses of exercise therapy for the treatment of PFPS. A Cochrane review3 has highlighted the effectiveness of rehabilitation treatment in helping to reduce knee pain and function in patients with PFPS. Tan et al4 showed that annual direct medical costs are higher in patients receiving rehabilitation treatment compared with those not receiving treatment, although the latter generate higher social costs, in particular, deriving from loss of productivity and work efficiency. Overall, therefore, rehabilitation treatment of PFPS has a favorable cost-effectiveness ratio. But what arewe treating whenwe treat PFPS? A symptom or a disease? I certainly have no intention of wading into the complex debate regarding the nomenclature and classification of all those clinical situations in which patellofemoral pain, or anterior knee pain as it may more generally be defined, can be recognized as a component. However, it is certainly true that patellofemoral pain belongs to a category of chronic osteoarticular pain that, over the years, has been the focus of a proliferation of therapeutic approaches aimed primarily at treating the symptom rather than its cause, thereby interpreting pain as a disease per se, rather than a sign of a problem. I am thinking, in particular, of lower back pain, a clinical condition that nowadays often seems to be dealt independently of its underlying organic cause, and that has attracted considerable attention from pain therapists aiming to address chronic pain in a multidisciplinary framework in which certain neuropathological mechanisms underlying pain, such as central sensitization, cortical reorganization, neuroimmune dysregulation, and sympathetic nervous system upregulation, are seen as possible treatment targets. Even the biopsychosocial approach has been introduced into the multimodal management of chronic low back pain. A Medline search using the terms “biopsychosocial & low back pain” will identify as many as 250 articles that approach the problem of low back pain from a sociocultural perspective. Today, however, we can only wonder what became of the “bio” part of chronic pain treatment,5 while fortunately, or unfortunately, use of the biopsychosocial approach in the field of patellofemoral pain is limited to a single study.6 We must certainly avoid accepting, uncritically, the idea that “painequalsdamage”; afterall,werethis thecase, itwould be impossible tounderstandwhychronicpain isnotconstantly\",\"PeriodicalId\":37852,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Joints\",\"volume\":\"6 2\",\"pages\":\"73-74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1055/s-0038-1667195\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Joints\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1667195\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Joints","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1667195","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Patellofemoral Pain: Symptom or Disease?
Two clinical studies published in this issue of Joints deal with the complex issueofpatellofemoral pain treatment. Enea et al1 report the results obtained using distalization and medialization of the tibial tuberosity, a surgical treatment for potential patellar instability (PPI) associated with a particularly “challenging” predisposing factor, namely, the patella alta. The index group (PPI group), consisting of patients with pain but no episodes of frank patellar instability, was compared with a group of patients reporting pain and objective patellar instability. The authors found that the treatment significantly reduced pain and improved knee function in both groups. However, the improvement in subjective instability was significantly more marked in the patients with PPI. In short, the proposed treatment was found to be particularly effective in the treatment of patients with PPI and patellofemoral pain. The article by Uboldi et al,2 concerns a prospective randomized trial on the efficacy of an elastomeric knee brace used in the treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) in adjunct to a specifically developed rehabilitation program. Function was found to be significantly improved both in the study group and in the controls (who only received rehabilitation); however, use of the knee brace was associated with significantly reduced pain. Patellofemoral pain is, undoubtedly, a clinical problem with a high social and economic impact, given that it affects a young and active section of the population. Indeed, in addition to rehabilitation treatment costs, it is also necessary to consider the costs related to reduced productivity, due to days off work, and reduced work efficiency. Undoubtedly, surgery, when indicated, is effective in resolving symptoms. However, in most cases, the pain in PFPS is disabling, and surgical treatment, however adequately it corrects the factors underlying the clinical presentation, is rather invasive and not always predictable in terms of late sequelae. There have been few rigorous analyses of exercise therapy for the treatment of PFPS. A Cochrane review3 has highlighted the effectiveness of rehabilitation treatment in helping to reduce knee pain and function in patients with PFPS. Tan et al4 showed that annual direct medical costs are higher in patients receiving rehabilitation treatment compared with those not receiving treatment, although the latter generate higher social costs, in particular, deriving from loss of productivity and work efficiency. Overall, therefore, rehabilitation treatment of PFPS has a favorable cost-effectiveness ratio. But what arewe treating whenwe treat PFPS? A symptom or a disease? I certainly have no intention of wading into the complex debate regarding the nomenclature and classification of all those clinical situations in which patellofemoral pain, or anterior knee pain as it may more generally be defined, can be recognized as a component. However, it is certainly true that patellofemoral pain belongs to a category of chronic osteoarticular pain that, over the years, has been the focus of a proliferation of therapeutic approaches aimed primarily at treating the symptom rather than its cause, thereby interpreting pain as a disease per se, rather than a sign of a problem. I am thinking, in particular, of lower back pain, a clinical condition that nowadays often seems to be dealt independently of its underlying organic cause, and that has attracted considerable attention from pain therapists aiming to address chronic pain in a multidisciplinary framework in which certain neuropathological mechanisms underlying pain, such as central sensitization, cortical reorganization, neuroimmune dysregulation, and sympathetic nervous system upregulation, are seen as possible treatment targets. Even the biopsychosocial approach has been introduced into the multimodal management of chronic low back pain. A Medline search using the terms “biopsychosocial & low back pain” will identify as many as 250 articles that approach the problem of low back pain from a sociocultural perspective. Today, however, we can only wonder what became of the “bio” part of chronic pain treatment,5 while fortunately, or unfortunately, use of the biopsychosocial approach in the field of patellofemoral pain is limited to a single study.6 We must certainly avoid accepting, uncritically, the idea that “painequalsdamage”; afterall,werethis thecase, itwould be impossible tounderstandwhychronicpain isnotconstantly
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Joints
Joints Medicine-Rehabilitation
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Joints is the official publication of SIGASCOT (Italian Society of the Knee, Arthroscopy, Sports Traumatology, Cartilage and Orthopaedic Technology). As an Open Acccess journal, it publishes papers on clinical and basic research, review articles, technical notes, case reports, and editorials about the latest developments in knee surgery, arthroscopy, sports traumatology, cartilage, orthopaedic technology, upper limb, and related rehabilitation. Letters to the Editor and comments on the journal''s content are always welcome.
期刊最新文献
Erratum: Porous-Coated Metaphyseal Sleeves in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: Midterm Results. Hip and Groin Pain in Soccer Players. Acute Groin Pain Syndrome Due to Internal Obturator Muscle Injury in a Professional Football Player. Short-Term Outcomes of the Grammont Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: Comparison between First and Second Generation Delta Prosthesis. The Relationship between Kinesiophobia and Return to Sport after Shoulder Surgery for Recurrent Anterior Instability.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1