Patellofemoral pain affects a large proportion of the population, from adolescents to older adults, and carries a substantial personal and societal burden. An international group of scientists and clinicians meets biennially at the International Patellofemoral Research Retreat to share research findings related to patellofemoral pain conditions and develop consensus statements using best practice methods. This consensus statement, from the 5th International Patellofemoral Research Retreat held in Australia in July 2017, focuses on exercise therapy and physical interventions (eg, orthoses, taping and manual therapy) for patellofemoral pain. Literature searches were conducted to identify new systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published since the 2016 Consensus Statement. The methodological quality of included systematic reviews and RCTs was graded using AMSTAR and PEDro, respectively. Evidence-based statements were developed from included papers and presented to a panel of 41 patellofemoral pain experts for consensus discussion and voting. Recommendations from the expert panel support the use of exercise therapy (especially the combination of hip-focused and knee-focused exercises), combined interventions and foot orthoses to improve pain and/or function in people with patellofemoral pain. The use of patellofemoral, knee or lumbar mobilisations in isolation, or electrophysical agents, is not recommended. There is uncertainty regarding the use of patellar taping/bracing, acupuncture/dry needling, manual soft tissue techniques, blood flow restriction training and gait retraining in patients with patellofemoral pain. In 2017, we launched the International Patellofemoral Research Network (www.ipfrn.org) to consolidate and grow our patellofemoral research community, facilitate collaboration and disseminate patellofemoral pain knowledge to clinicians and the general public. The 6th International Patellofemoral Research Retreat will be held in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA, in October 2019.

Is patient education effective as a standalone intervention or combined with other interventions for people with knee osteoarthritis? Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. MEDLINE, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL and Web of Science were searched from inception to April 2020. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used for included studies, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) was used to interpret certainty of results. People with knee osteoarthritis. Any patient education intervention compared with any non-pharmacological comparator. Primary outcomes were self-reported pain and function. Twenty-nine trials involving 4,107 participants were included, informing low to very-low certainty evidence. Nineteen of 28 (68%) pooled comparisons were not statistically significant. Patient education was superior to usual care for pain (SMD -0.35, 95% CI -0.56 to -0.14) and function in the short term (-0.31, 95% CI -0.62 to 0.00), but inferior to exercise therapy for pain in the short term (0.77, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.47). Combining patient education with exercise therapy produced superior outcomes compared with patient education alone for pain in the short term (0.44, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.69) and function in the short (0.81, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.08) and medium term (0.39, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.62). When using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index for these comparisons, clinically important differences indicated that patient education was inferior to exercise therapy for pain in the short term (MD 1.56, 95% CI 0.14 to 2.98) and the combination of patient education and exercise therapy for function in the short term (8.94, 95% CI 6.05 to 11.82). Although patient education produced statistically superior short-term pain and function outcomes compared with usual care, differences were small and may not be clinically important. Patient education should not be provided as a standalone treatment and should be combined with exercise therapy to provide statistically superior and clinically important short-term improvements in function compared with education alone. PROSPERO CRD42019122004.

Objective To systematically review evidence of primary outcomes from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining the effect of treatment strategies on quality of life (QoL) or psychosocial factors in individuals with knee osteoarthritis (OA). Design Systematic review with meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Embase, SPORTDiscus, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Web of Science were searched from inception to November 2017. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies We included RCTs investigating the effect of conservative interventions on QoL or psychosocial factors in individuals with knee OA. Only RCTs considering these outcomes as primary were included. Results Pooled data supported the use of exercise therapy compared with controls for improving health-related and knee-related QoL. There was limited evidence that a combined treatment of yoga, transcutaneous electrical stimulation and ultrasound may be effective in improving QoL. Limited evidence supported the use of cognitive behavioural therapies (with or without being combined with exercise therapy) for improving psychosocial factors such as self-efficacy, depression and psychological distress. Summary/Conclusion Exercise therapy (with or without being combined with other interventions) seems to be effective in improving health-related and knee-related QoL or psychosocial factors of individuals with knee OA. In addition, evidence supports the use of cognitive behavioural therapies (with or without exercise therapy) for improving psychosocial factors such as self-efficacy, depression and psychological distress in individuals with knee OA. PROSPERO registration number CRD42016047602.