Protonics Knee Brace Versus Hamstring Resisted Exercise (HRE) on Individuals With Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome (HRE)
Primary Purpose
Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome
Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Protonics Knee brace
Sports Cords
Sponsored by
About this trial
This is an interventional treatment trial for Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- Subjects will be males and females who have Patellofemoral pain symptoms for more than 1 month, have pain level ≥ 3 on a Numeric Pain Rating Scale, and pain during at least 2 activities, such as squatting, ascending/descending stairs, and/or running.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Subjects will be excluded if they have previous traumatic injuries to the knee joint/lower limbs, sign, and symptoms of meniscus tear or ligamentous-related pathology, neurological disorders and being on pain medication."
Sites / Locations
- Loma Linda University Health
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Experimental
Arm Label
Protonics knee brace
Sport cords
Arm Description
All subjects were fitted with a regular-sized Protonics knee brace with resistive settings to resist knee flexion.
Resistive sports cord to resist knee flexion.
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
Anterior Pelvic Tilt
Anterior Pelvic Tilt: tilting of the pelvic will be measured with CHEK inclinometer. Tilting will be measured while subjects are in a standing position. The examiner will determine the two measure line marks, anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) and posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) to find the oblique angle of the pelvic.
Normative values from other study that we will be using to compare anterior pelvic tilt: Male = 9° and Female = 12° (from Nguyen study in 2007).
The CHEK inclinometer caliper has two arms; one arm will be placed on ASIS (front of pelvis) while the other on the PSIS (back of pelvis). The angle of the caliper will be determined to record the degree of anterior pelvic tilt.
Baseline measurement to Post-intervention measurement = Four (4) weeks.
Anterior Pelvic Tilt
Anterior Pelvic Tilt: tilting of the pelvic will be measured with CHEK inclinometer. Tilting will be measured while subjects are in a standing position. The examiner will determine the two measure line marks, anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) and posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) to find the oblique angle of the pelvic. Approximate normally anterior pelvic tilt for male is 9° and for female is about 12° (Nguyen, 2007). The caliper has two arms; one arm will be placed on ASIP while the other on the PSIS. The angle of the caliper will be determined to record the degree of anterior pelvic tilt.
Anterior Pelvic Tilt
Anterior Pelvic Tilt: tilting of the pelvic will be measured with CHEK inclinometer. Tilting will be measured while subjects are in a standing position. The examiner will determine the two measure line marks, anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) and posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) to find the oblique angle of the pelvic. Approximate normally anterior pelvic tilt for male is 9° and for female is about 12° (Nguyen, 2007). The caliper has two arms; one arm will be placed on ASIP while the other on the PSIS. The angle of the caliper will be determined to record the degree of anterior pelvic tilt.
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
The Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) is a subjective measure in which individuals rate their pain on an eleven-point numerical scale. The scale is composed of 0 (no pain at all) to 10 (worst imaginable pain).
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Used to assess pain level throughout the intervention. Scale: 0-10. Scoring: 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst, imaginable pain).
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
The Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) is a subjective measure in which individuals rate their pain on an eleven-point numerical scale. The scale is composed of 0 (no pain at all) to 10 (worst imaginable pain).
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Used to assess pain level throughout the intervention. Scale: 0-10. Scoring: 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst, imaginable pain).
Global Rating of Change (GROC)
GROC scales offer a flexible, quick, and simple method of charting self-assessed clinical progress in research and clinical settings. 15-Point: Scale -7 to 0 to +7. A score of 0 = No change, +1 to +3 = small positive change, +4 to +5 = Moderate positive change, +6 to +7 = Large positive change. All negative scores (minus numbers) represent a poor outcome (-7 being the worst possible outcome).
Global Rating of Change (GROC)
GRC scales offer a flexible, quick, and simple method of charting self-assessed clinical progress in research and clinical settings. It ranges from -7 to 7, in which item -7 represent very great deal worse, 0 represent no change in progress, and 7 exemplify a very great better.
Global Rating of Change (GROC)
GRC scales offer a flexible, quick, and simple method of charting self-assessed clinical progress in research and clinical settings. It ranges from -7 to 7, in which item -7 represent very great deal worse, 0 represent no change in progress, and 7 exemplify a very great better.
Kujala Score
A self-report questionnaire, which is used to evaluate subjective symptoms and functional limitations in subjects with PFPS with a score range between of 0 - 100 based on pain associated with variety of functional activities such as prolonged sitting, squatting, running, and jumping. A score close to 100 indicates a higher functional performance. A score close to 0 represents a low level of function. Kujala scale has shown acceptable test-retest reliability (rho = 0.86) (Paxon et al, 2003). Kujala scale scores will be documented at the beginning and end of the intervention program.
Kujala Score
A self-report questionnaire, which is used to evaluate subjective symptoms and functional limitations in subjects with PFPS with a score range between of 0 - 100 based on pain associated with variety of functional activities such as prolonged sitting, squatting, running, and jumping. A score close to 100 indicates a higher functional performance. Kujala scale has shown acceptable test-retest reliability (rho = 0.86) (Paxon et al, 2003). Kujala scale scores will be documented at the beginning and end of the intervention program.
Lateral Step-Down Test
Lateral step test: is a quick and simple practical clinical measure of functional. Subjects with PFPS will be asked to step up and down on a 15-cm step for 15 seconds each with a cadence of 2 steps per second. The total number of step-ups during this time will be recorded. Subjects will be asked to report a verbal pain score during the step-up test at each test session. This test will be performed every two weeks to document any improvement in the functional performance. The test has shown to be reliable and valid, with test-retest reliability of (ICC = 0.90) (Ross et al, 1997).
Lateral Step-Down Test
Lateral step test: is a quick and simple practical clinical measure of functional. Subjects with PFPS will be asked to step up and down on a 15-cm step for 15 seconds each with a cadence of 2 steps per second. The total number of step-ups during this time will be recorded. Subjects will be asked to report a verbal pain score during the step-up test at each test session. This test will be performed every two weeks to document any improvement in the functional performance. The test has shown to be reliable and valid, with test-retest reliability of (ICC = 0.90) (Ross et al, 1997).
Lateral Step-Down Test
Lateral step test: is a quick and simple practical clinical measure of functional. Subjects with PFPS will be asked to step up and down on a 15-cm step for 15 seconds each with a cadence of 2 steps per second. The total number of step-ups during this time will be recorded. This test will be performed every two weeks to document any improvement in the functional performance. The test has shown to be reliable and valid, with test-retest reliability of (ICC = 0.90) (Ross et al, 1997).
Lateral Step-Down Test
Lateral step test: is a quick and simple practical clinical measure of functional. Subjects with PFPS will be asked to step up and down on a 15-cm step for 15 seconds each with a cadence of 2 steps per second. The total number of step-ups during this time will be recorded. This test will be performed every two weeks to document any improvement in the functional performance. The test has shown to be reliable and valid, with test-retest reliability of (ICC = 0.90) (Ross et al, 1997).
Secondary Outcome Measures
Iliotibial Band Flexibility
To assess the flexibility of iliotibial band
Iliotibial Band Flexibility
To assess the flexibility of iliotibial band
Iliotibial Band Flexibility
To assess the flexibility of iliotibial band
Iliotibial Band Flexibility
To assess the flexibility of iliotibial band
Hip Internal Rotation ROM
To measure the internal rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Hip Internal Rotation ROM
To measure the internal rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Hip Internal Rotation ROM
To measure the internal rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Hip Internal Rotation ROM
To measure the internal rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Hip External Rotation ROM
To measure the External rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Hip External Rotation ROM
To measure the External rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Hip External Rotation ROM
To measure the external rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Hip External Rotation ROM
To measure the external rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Full Information
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03042559
Brief Title
Protonics Knee Brace Versus Hamstring Resisted Exercise (HRE) on Individuals With Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome
Acronym
HRE
Official Title
The Effects of Protonics Knee Brace Versus Hamstring Resisted Exercise on Individuals With Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
April 2020
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
February 14, 2017 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
January 8, 2018 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
January 8, 2018 (Actual)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Loma Linda University
4. Oversight
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
Yes
Data Monitoring Committee
No
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
ProtonicsTM Knee brace has been suggested as an intervention for patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS). However, the effectiveness of this knee brace compared to traditional conservative methods knee rehabilitation is lacking. The objective of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the effect of ProtonicsTM knee brace vs. sports cord on knee pain and function in patients with PFPS.
Detailed Description
The purpose of this graduate student research study was to compare the effect of ProtonicsTM knee brace vs. sports cord on knee pain and function in patients with PFPS.
Design: Randomized controlled trial.
Setting: Loma Linda University.
Participants: Subjects with patellofemoral pain will participate in the study.
Intervention: Subjects will be randomized to one of two treatment groups, the ProtonicsTM knee brace or the sport cord to complete a series of resistance exercises over the course of 4 weeks.
Main Outcome Measures: Both groups will be evaluated according to the following clinical outcomes: Anterior pelvic tilt (APT), hip internal/external rotation, and iliotibial band flexibility. The following functional outcomes were also assessed: Global Rating of Change (GROC) scale, the Kujala score, the Numeric Pain Rating Scale, and the lateral step-down test.
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
43 (Actual)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
Protonics knee brace
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
All subjects were fitted with a regular-sized Protonics knee brace with resistive settings to resist knee flexion.
Arm Title
Sport cords
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Resistive sports cord to resist knee flexion.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Protonics Knee brace
Intervention Description
The Protonics system has been introduced to physical therapists as a potential treatment for PFPS. The system includes a brace set to resist knee flexion and a set of specific exercises to perform daily. Through resistance to knee flexion, the system is advertised to decrease retropatellar contact pressure due to changes in pelvis inclination and available hip rotation. Specifically, resistance to knee flexion is purported to increase hamstring activity and inhibit the activity of the tensor fasciae latae and psoas muscles. The manufacturer asserts that prolonged use of the system results in greater hamstring activation, which leads to permanent structural changes through reciprocal inhibition at the hip and pelvis. The warm-up consisted of the subject wearing the ProtonicsTM knee brace set at a moderate resistance level and flexing the knees while sitting, standing, and reclining in the supine and prone positions.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Sports Cords
Intervention Description
Subjects assigned to the sport cord group were asked to do the same warm-ups and exercises using the sport cord in the supine, standing, sitting, and prone positions. prone. The only difference is that subjects were asked to only walk backwards instead of forwards in order to avoid activation of the hip flexor muscle. The appropriate level of resistance for each subject was calculated by multiplying their weight in pounds by 0.3. Subjects were then given either light, medium, or heavy resistance cords according to the following classification scheme: light (pink color) with resistance 3 (R3), 0-30 lbs.; medium (orange color) with resistance 5 (R5) 0-50 lbs.; heavy (yellow color) with resistance 7 (R7) 0-70 lbs. All subjects completed three study visits, and a total of four measurements were taken at baseline, immediately following the first session, at two weeks, and at 4 weeks.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Anterior Pelvic Tilt
Description
Anterior Pelvic Tilt: tilting of the pelvic will be measured with CHEK inclinometer. Tilting will be measured while subjects are in a standing position. The examiner will determine the two measure line marks, anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) and posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) to find the oblique angle of the pelvic.
Normative values from other study that we will be using to compare anterior pelvic tilt: Male = 9° and Female = 12° (from Nguyen study in 2007).
The CHEK inclinometer caliper has two arms; one arm will be placed on ASIS (front of pelvis) while the other on the PSIS (back of pelvis). The angle of the caliper will be determined to record the degree of anterior pelvic tilt.
Baseline measurement to Post-intervention measurement = Four (4) weeks.
Time Frame
Baseline to Post intervention
Title
Anterior Pelvic Tilt
Description
Anterior Pelvic Tilt: tilting of the pelvic will be measured with CHEK inclinometer. Tilting will be measured while subjects are in a standing position. The examiner will determine the two measure line marks, anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) and posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) to find the oblique angle of the pelvic. Approximate normally anterior pelvic tilt for male is 9° and for female is about 12° (Nguyen, 2007). The caliper has two arms; one arm will be placed on ASIP while the other on the PSIS. The angle of the caliper will be determined to record the degree of anterior pelvic tilt.
Time Frame
2 weeks
Title
Anterior Pelvic Tilt
Description
Anterior Pelvic Tilt: tilting of the pelvic will be measured with CHEK inclinometer. Tilting will be measured while subjects are in a standing position. The examiner will determine the two measure line marks, anterior superior iliac spine (ASIS) and posterior superior iliac spine (PSIS) to find the oblique angle of the pelvic. Approximate normally anterior pelvic tilt for male is 9° and for female is about 12° (Nguyen, 2007). The caliper has two arms; one arm will be placed on ASIP while the other on the PSIS. The angle of the caliper will be determined to record the degree of anterior pelvic tilt.
Time Frame
4 weeks
Title
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Description
The Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) is a subjective measure in which individuals rate their pain on an eleven-point numerical scale. The scale is composed of 0 (no pain at all) to 10 (worst imaginable pain).
Time Frame
baseline
Title
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Description
Used to assess pain level throughout the intervention. Scale: 0-10. Scoring: 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst, imaginable pain).
Time Frame
Immediately following 1st session
Title
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Description
The Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) is a subjective measure in which individuals rate their pain on an eleven-point numerical scale. The scale is composed of 0 (no pain at all) to 10 (worst imaginable pain).
Time Frame
2 weeks
Title
Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)
Description
Used to assess pain level throughout the intervention. Scale: 0-10. Scoring: 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst, imaginable pain).
Time Frame
4 weeks
Title
Global Rating of Change (GROC)
Description
GROC scales offer a flexible, quick, and simple method of charting self-assessed clinical progress in research and clinical settings. 15-Point: Scale -7 to 0 to +7. A score of 0 = No change, +1 to +3 = small positive change, +4 to +5 = Moderate positive change, +6 to +7 = Large positive change. All negative scores (minus numbers) represent a poor outcome (-7 being the worst possible outcome).
Time Frame
Immediately following 1st session
Title
Global Rating of Change (GROC)
Description
GRC scales offer a flexible, quick, and simple method of charting self-assessed clinical progress in research and clinical settings. It ranges from -7 to 7, in which item -7 represent very great deal worse, 0 represent no change in progress, and 7 exemplify a very great better.
Time Frame
2 weeks
Title
Global Rating of Change (GROC)
Description
GRC scales offer a flexible, quick, and simple method of charting self-assessed clinical progress in research and clinical settings. It ranges from -7 to 7, in which item -7 represent very great deal worse, 0 represent no change in progress, and 7 exemplify a very great better.
Time Frame
4 weeks
Title
Kujala Score
Description
A self-report questionnaire, which is used to evaluate subjective symptoms and functional limitations in subjects with PFPS with a score range between of 0 - 100 based on pain associated with variety of functional activities such as prolonged sitting, squatting, running, and jumping. A score close to 100 indicates a higher functional performance. A score close to 0 represents a low level of function. Kujala scale has shown acceptable test-retest reliability (rho = 0.86) (Paxon et al, 2003). Kujala scale scores will be documented at the beginning and end of the intervention program.
Time Frame
baseline
Title
Kujala Score
Description
A self-report questionnaire, which is used to evaluate subjective symptoms and functional limitations in subjects with PFPS with a score range between of 0 - 100 based on pain associated with variety of functional activities such as prolonged sitting, squatting, running, and jumping. A score close to 100 indicates a higher functional performance. Kujala scale has shown acceptable test-retest reliability (rho = 0.86) (Paxon et al, 2003). Kujala scale scores will be documented at the beginning and end of the intervention program.
Time Frame
4 weeks
Title
Lateral Step-Down Test
Description
Lateral step test: is a quick and simple practical clinical measure of functional. Subjects with PFPS will be asked to step up and down on a 15-cm step for 15 seconds each with a cadence of 2 steps per second. The total number of step-ups during this time will be recorded. Subjects will be asked to report a verbal pain score during the step-up test at each test session. This test will be performed every two weeks to document any improvement in the functional performance. The test has shown to be reliable and valid, with test-retest reliability of (ICC = 0.90) (Ross et al, 1997).
Time Frame
baseline
Title
Lateral Step-Down Test
Description
Lateral step test: is a quick and simple practical clinical measure of functional. Subjects with PFPS will be asked to step up and down on a 15-cm step for 15 seconds each with a cadence of 2 steps per second. The total number of step-ups during this time will be recorded. Subjects will be asked to report a verbal pain score during the step-up test at each test session. This test will be performed every two weeks to document any improvement in the functional performance. The test has shown to be reliable and valid, with test-retest reliability of (ICC = 0.90) (Ross et al, 1997).
Time Frame
Immediately following 1st session
Title
Lateral Step-Down Test
Description
Lateral step test: is a quick and simple practical clinical measure of functional. Subjects with PFPS will be asked to step up and down on a 15-cm step for 15 seconds each with a cadence of 2 steps per second. The total number of step-ups during this time will be recorded. This test will be performed every two weeks to document any improvement in the functional performance. The test has shown to be reliable and valid, with test-retest reliability of (ICC = 0.90) (Ross et al, 1997).
Time Frame
2 weeks
Title
Lateral Step-Down Test
Description
Lateral step test: is a quick and simple practical clinical measure of functional. Subjects with PFPS will be asked to step up and down on a 15-cm step for 15 seconds each with a cadence of 2 steps per second. The total number of step-ups during this time will be recorded. This test will be performed every two weeks to document any improvement in the functional performance. The test has shown to be reliable and valid, with test-retest reliability of (ICC = 0.90) (Ross et al, 1997).
Time Frame
4 weeks
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Iliotibial Band Flexibility
Description
To assess the flexibility of iliotibial band
Time Frame
baseline
Title
Iliotibial Band Flexibility
Description
To assess the flexibility of iliotibial band
Time Frame
Immediately following 1st session
Title
Iliotibial Band Flexibility
Description
To assess the flexibility of iliotibial band
Time Frame
2 weeks
Title
Iliotibial Band Flexibility
Description
To assess the flexibility of iliotibial band
Time Frame
4 weeks
Title
Hip Internal Rotation ROM
Description
To measure the internal rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Time Frame
baseline
Title
Hip Internal Rotation ROM
Description
To measure the internal rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Time Frame
Immediately following 1st session
Title
Hip Internal Rotation ROM
Description
To measure the internal rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Time Frame
2 weeks
Title
Hip Internal Rotation ROM
Description
To measure the internal rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Time Frame
4 weeks
Title
Hip External Rotation ROM
Description
To measure the External rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Time Frame
baseline
Title
Hip External Rotation ROM
Description
To measure the External rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Time Frame
Immediately following 1st session
Title
Hip External Rotation ROM
Description
To measure the external rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Time Frame
2 weeks
Title
Hip External Rotation ROM
Description
To measure the external rotation of hip in sitting natural position with hip and knee on 90 degree flexion
Time Frame
4 weeks
10. Eligibility
Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
45 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
Subjects will be males and females who have Patellofemoral pain symptoms for more than 1 month, have pain level ≥ 3 on a Numeric Pain Rating Scale, and pain during at least 2 activities, such as squatting, ascending/descending stairs, and/or running.
Exclusion Criteria:
Subjects will be excluded if they have previous traumatic injuries to the knee joint/lower limbs, sign, and symptoms of meniscus tear or ligamentous-related pathology, neurological disorders and being on pain medication."
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Everett Lohman, Dsc
Organizational Affiliation
Loma Linda University
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Loma Linda University Health
City
Loma Linda
State/Province
California
ZIP/Postal Code
92354
Country
United States
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
9079175
Citation
Arroll B, Ellis-Pegler E, Edwards A, Sutcliffe G. Patellofemoral pain syndrome. A critical review of the clinical trials on nonoperative therapy. Am J Sports Med. 1997 Mar-Apr;25(2):207-12. doi: 10.1177/036354659702500212.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
8231783
Citation
Bockrath K, Wooden C, Worrell T, Ingersoll CD, Farr J. Effects of patella taping on patella position and perceived pain. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1993 Sep;25(9):989-92.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
22513943
Citation
Callaghan MJ, Selfe J. Patellar taping for patellofemoral pain syndrome in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Apr 18;(4):CD006717. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006717.pub2.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
24725788
Citation
Azevedo DC, Santos H, Carneiro RL, Andrade GT. Reliability of sagittal pelvic position assessments in standing, sitting and during hip flexion using palpation meter. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2014 Apr;18(2):210-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2013.05.017. Epub 2013 Jun 17.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
15901122
Citation
Denton J, Willson JD, Ballantyne BT, Davis IS. The addition of the Protonics brace system to a rehabilitation protocol to address patellofemoral joint syndrome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2005 Apr;35(4):210-9. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2005.35.4.210.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
15085211
Citation
Earl JE, Piazza SJ, Hertel J. The Protonics Knee Brace Unloads the Quadriceps Muscles in Healthy Subjects. J Athl Train. 2004 Mar;39(1):44-49.
Results Reference
result
PubMed Identifier
12527250
Citation
Gajdosik RL, Sandler MM, Marr HL. Influence of knee positions and gender on the Ober test for length of the iliotibial band. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2003 Jan;18(1):77-9. doi: 10.1016/s0268-0033(02)00168-7.
Results Reference
result
Learn more about this trial
Protonics Knee Brace Versus Hamstring Resisted Exercise (HRE) on Individuals With Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs