Which patellofemoral joint imaging features are associated with patellofemoral pain? Systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives: To review the association between patellofemoral joint (PFJ) imaging features and patellofemoral pain (PFP). Design: A systematic review of the literature from AMED, CiNAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, PEDro, EMBASE and SPORTDiscus was undertaken from their inception to September 2014. Studies were eligible if they used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), ultrasound (US) or x-ray (XR) to compare PFJ features between a PFP group and an asymptomatic control group in people < 45 years of age. A pooled meta-analysis was conducted and data was interpreted using a best evidence synthesis. Results: Forty studies (all moderate to high quality) describing 1,043 people with PFP and 839 controls were included. Two features were deemed to have a large standardised mean difference (SMD) based on meta-analysis: an increased MRI bisect offset at 0° knee flexion under load (0.99; 95% CI: 0.49, 1.49) and an increased CT congruence angle at 15° knee flexion, both under load (1.40 95% CI: 0.04, 2.76) and without load (1.24; 95% CI: 0.37,2.12). A medium SMD was identified for MRI patella tilt and patellofemoral contact area. Limited evidence was found to support the association of other imaging features with PFP. A sensitivity analysis showed an increase in the SMD for patella bisect offset at 0° knee flexion (1.91; 95% CI: 1.31,2.52) and patella tilt at 0° knee flexion (0.99; 95% CI: 0.47,1.52) under full weight bearing. Conclusion: Certain PFJ imaging features were associated with PFP. Future interventional strategies may be targeted at these features

Developing practice in breastfeeding

This paper reports on an approach to practice development in breastfeeding as part of a national programme of work to address inequalities in maternal and child nutrition. The production and dissemination of evidence and guidelines is necessary but not sufficient on its own to effect change in practice, particularly when dealing with complex public health issues. In the case of breastfeeding, review evidence and national guidance have shown that multifaceted changes are essential if policy aspirations are to be realized. The objectives of the programme described here were to (1) inform and enable practice development in breastfeeding in low-income areas; (2) evaluate the impact of approaches used; and (3) develop robust approaches and appropriate material for use nationally. A conceptual framework was established, and a six-stage process is outlined. The recruitment of four sentinel sites across whole health economies, involving professionals and the voluntary sector, was an essential component of the programme. The strength of the model is that it provides a structured, cross-sectoral approach to practice development in public health. A key challenge is to identify whose responsibility it is to resource practice development when a number of disciplines and sectors are involved. This question needs to be addressed if public health guidance is to be of sustained benefit