RESUMO
CONTEXT: Patellofemoral pain (PFP) has poor long-term recovery outcomes. Central sensitization describes central nervous system changes altering pain modulation, which can complicate recovery (poorer prognosis, worse function). Signs of central sensitization include amplified pain facilitation, pain hypersensitivity, and impaired pain inhibition, which can be measured with temporal summation of pain (TSP), pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) and conditioned pain modulation (CPM), respectively. Sex differences exist for these test responses, but female-only PFP investigations of sensitization are uncommon. Understanding pain modulation in females with PFP could improve treatment protocols. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether females with PFP exhibit signs of central sensitization (greater TSP, lower PPTs, reduced CPM) compared to pain-free females. DESIGN: Cross-sectional Setting: Laboratory Patients or Other Participants: Thirty-three females [(20 PFP, 13 pain-free); Age: PFP 29.2 ± 7 years, pain-free 28 ± 7 years; Height: PFP 166.7 ± 5.9cm, pain-free 166 ± 9.5cm, Mass: PFP 66.7 ± 9.6kg, pain-free 69.3 ± 7.5kg). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: TSP was assessed with ten punctate stimuli applied to the knee and calculated by the difference in pain intensity between beginning and end responses. PPTs were tested at four sites [3 for local hypersensitivity (knee), 1 for widespread hypersensitivity (hand)]. CPM was conducted by comparing PPTs during two conditions (baseline, ice immersion). CPM response was defined as the percent difference between conditions. Between-group differences in TSP response were analyzed with a Welch's test. Separate Welch's tests analyzed group comparisons of PPTs and CPM responses at four sites. RESULTS: Females with PFP exhibited greater TSP response (P=0.019) and lower CPM response at patella center (P=0.010) and hand sites (P=0.007) than pain-free females. PPT group differences were not observed at any site (P>0.0125). CONCLUSIONS: Females with PFP modulate pain differently than pain-free females. Clinicians should recognize signs of central sensitization and their potential impact on treatment options.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Patellofemoral pain (PFP) has high recurrence rates and minimal long-term treatment success. Central sensitization refers to dysfunctional pain modulation that occurs when nociceptive neurons become hyperresponsive. Researchers in this area of PFP have been increasingly productive in the past decade. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether evidence supports manifestations of central sensitization in individuals with PFP. DATA SOURCES: We searched MeSH terms for quantitative sensory testing (QST) pressure pain thresholds (PPTs), conditioned pain modulation (CPM), temporal summation, sensitization, hyperalgesia, and anterior knee pain or PFP in PubMed, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Academic Search Complete, and EBSCOhost. STUDY SELECTION: Peer-reviewed studies that were written in English and published between 2005 and 2020 and investigated QST or pain mapping in a sample with PFP were included in this review. DATA EXTRACTION: The initial search yielded 140 articles. After duplicates were removed, 78 abstracts were reviewed. The full text of 21 studies was examined, and we included 15 studies in our evaluation: 6 in the meta-analysis, 4 in the systematic review, and 5 in both the meta-analysis and systematic review. DATA SYNTHESIS: A random-effects meta-analysis was conducted for 4 QST variables (local PPTs, remote PPTs, CPM, temporal summation). Strong evidence supported lower local and remote PPTs, impaired CPM, and facilitated temporal summation in individuals with PFP compared with pain-free individuals. Evidence for heat and cold pain thresholds was conflicting. Pain mapping demonstrated expanding pain patterns associated with long duration of PFP symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Signs of central sensitization were present in individuals with PFP, indicating altered pain modulation. The etiologic and treatment models of PFP should reflect the current body of evidence regarding central sensitization. Signs of central sensitization should be monitored clinically, and treatments with central effects should be considered as part of a multimodal plan of care.