Search

Importance: Approximately 5% of all primary care visits in adults are related to knee pain. Osteoarthritis (OA), patellofemoral pain, and meniscal tears are among the most common causes of knee pain. Observations: Knee OA, affecting an estimated 654 million people worldwide, is the most likely diagnosis of knee pain in patients aged 45 years or older who present with activity-related knee joint pain with no or less than 30 minutes of morning stiffness (95% sensitivity; 69% specificity). Patellofemoral pain typically affects people younger than 40 years who are physically active and has a lifetime prevalence of approximately 25%. The presence of anterior knee pain during a squat is approximately 91% sensitive and 50% specific for patellofemoral pain. Meniscal tears affect an estimated 12% of the adult population and can occur following acute trauma (eg, twisting injury) in people younger than 40 years. Alternatively, a meniscal tear may be a degenerative condition present in patients with knee OA who are aged 40 years or older. The McMurray test, consisting of concurrent knee rotation (internal or external to test lateral or medial meniscus, respectively) and extension (61% sensitivity; 84% specificity), and joint line tenderness (83% sensitivity; 83% specificity) assist diagnosis of meniscal tears. Radiographic imaging of all patients with possible knee OA is not recommended. First-line management of OA comprises exercise therapy, weight loss (if overweight), education, and self-management programs to empower patients to better manage their condition. Surgical referral for knee joint replacement can be considered for patients with end-stage OA (ie, no or minimal joint space with inability to cope with pain) after using all appropriate conservative options. For patellofemoral pain, hip and knee strengthening exercises in combination with foot orthoses or patellar taping are recommended, with no indication for surgery. Conservative management (exercise therapy for 4-6 weeks) is also appropriate for most meniscal tears. For severe traumatic (eg, bucket-handle) tears, consisting of displaced meniscal tissue, surgery is likely required. For degenerative meniscal tears, exercise therapy is first-line treatment; surgery is not indicated even in the presence of mechanical symptoms (eg, locking, catching). Conclusions and Relevance: Knee OA, patellofemoral pain, and meniscal tears are common causes of knee pain, can be diagnosed clinically, and can be associated with significant disability. First-line treatment for each condition consists of conservative management, with a focus on exercise, education, and self-management. This review summarizes current evidence regarding the diagnosis and treatment of knee osteoarthritis, patellofemoral pain, and meniscal tears. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key Points: Question: Does a weight loss and exercise program in community settings lead to improvement in knee pain in patients with osteoarthritis and overweight or obesity? Findings: This randomized clinical trial included 823 patients with knee osteoarthritis and overweight or obesity treated with diet and exercise vs an attention control. After 18 months, the adjusted mean difference in Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain score (range, 0-20) was −0.6, a difference that met statistical significance. Meaning: In patients with knee osteoarthritis and overweight or obesity, an 18-month program of weight loss and exercise based in community settings, compared with an attention control group, led to a small difference in knee pain of uncertain clinical importance. Importance: Some weight loss and exercise programs that have been successful in academic center–based trials have not been evaluated in community settings. Objective: To determine whether adaptation of a diet and exercise intervention to community settings resulted in a statistically significant reduction in pain, compared with an attention control group, at 18-month follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: Assessor-blinded randomized clinical trial conducted in community settings in urban and rural counties in North Carolina. Patients were men and women aged 50 years or older with knee osteoarthritis and overweight or obesity (body mass index ≥27). Enrollment (N = 823) occurred between May 2016 and August 2019, with follow-up ending in April 2021. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to either a diet and exercise intervention (n = 414) or an attention control (n = 409) group for 18 months. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the between-group difference in the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) knee pain score (range, 0 [none] to 20 [severe]; minimum clinically important difference, 1.6) over 18 months, tested using a repeated-measures mixed linear model with adjustments for covariates. There were 7 secondary outcomes including body weight. Results: Among the 823 randomized patients (mean age, 64.6 years; 637 [77%] women), 658 (80%) completed the trial. At 18-month follow-up, the adjusted mean WOMAC pain score was 5.0 in the diet and exercise group (n = 329) compared with 5.5 in the attention control group (n = 316) (adjusted difference, −0.6; 95% CI, −1.0 to −0.1; P =.02). Of 7 secondary outcomes, 5 were significantly better in the intervention group compared with control. The mean change in unadjusted 18-month body weight for patients with available data was −7.7 kg (8%) in the diet and exercise group (n = 289) and −1.7 kg (2%) in the attention control group (n = 273) (mean difference, −6.0 kg; 95% CI, −7.3 kg to −4.7 kg). There were 169 serious adverse events; none were definitely related to the study. There were 729 adverse events; 32 (4%) were definitely related to the study, including 10 body injuries (9 in diet and exercise; 1 in attention control), 7 muscle strains (6 in diet and exercise; 1 in attention control), and 6 trip/fall events (all 6 in diet and exercise). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with knee osteoarthritis and overweight or obesity, diet and exercise compared with an attention control led to a statistically significant but small difference in knee pain over 18 months. The magnitude of the difference in pain between groups is of uncertain clinical importance. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02577549 This randomized clinical trial assesses the effect of a diet and exercise intervention vs an attention control condition on knee pain at 18-month follow-up among individuals aged 50 years or older with knee osteoarthritis and overweight or obesity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Most clinical guidelines do not recommend platelet-rich plasma (PRP) for knee osteoarthritis (OA) because of lack of high-quality evidence on efficacy for symptoms and joint structure, but the guidelines emphasize the need for rigorous studies. Despite this, use of PRP in knee OA is increasing.Objective: To evaluate the effects of intra-articular PRP injections on symptoms and joint structure in patients with symptomatic mild to moderate radiographic medial knee OA.Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized, 2-group, placebo-controlled, participant-, injector-, and assessor-blinded clinical trial enrolled community-based participants (n = 288) aged 50 years or older with symptomatic medial knee OA (Kellgren and Lawrence grade 2 or 3) in Sydney and Melbourne, Australia, from August 24, 2017, to July 5, 2019. The 12-month follow-up was completed on July 22, 2020.Interventions: Interventions involved 3 intra-articular injections at weekly intervals of either leukocyte-poor PRP using a commercially available product (n = 144 participants) or saline placebo (n = 144 participants).Main Outcomes and Measures: The 2 primary outcomes were 12-month change in overall average knee pain scores (11-point scale; range, 0-10, with higher scores indicating worse pain; minimum clinically important difference of 1.8) and percentage change in medial tibial cartilage volume as assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Thirty-one secondary outcomes (25 symptom related and 6 MRI assessed; minimum clinically important difference not known) evaluated pain, function, quality of life, global change, and joint structures at 2-month and/or 12-month follow-up.Results: Among 288 patients who were randomized (mean age, 61.9 [SD, 6.5] years; 169 [59%] women), 269 (93%) completed the trial. In both groups, 140 participants (97%) received all 3 injections. After 12 months, treatment with PRP vs placebo injection resulted in a mean change in knee pain scores of -2.1 vs -1.8 points, respectively (difference, -0.4 [95% CI, -0.9 to 0.2] points; P = .17). The mean change in medial tibial cartilage volume was -1.4% vs -1.2%, respectively (difference, -0.2% [95% CI, -1.9% to 1.5%]; P = .81). Of 31 prespecified secondary outcomes, 29 showed no significant between-group differences.Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with symptomatic mild to moderate radiographic knee OA, intra-articular injection of PRP, compared with injection of saline placebo, did not result in a significant difference in symptoms or joint structure at 12 months. These findings do not support use of PRP for the management of knee OA.Trial Registration: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry Identifier: ACTRN12617000853347. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Thigh muscle weakness is associated with knee discomfort and osteoarthritis disease progression. Little is known about the efficacy of high-intensity strength training in patients with knee osteoarthritis or whether it may worsen knee symptoms.Objective: To determine whether high-intensity strength training reduces knee pain and knee joint compressive forces more than low-intensity strength training and more than attention control in patients with knee osteoarthritis.Design, Setting, and Participants: Assessor-blinded randomized clinical trial conducted at a university research center in North Carolina that included 377 community-dwelling adults (≥50 years) with body mass index (BMI) ranging from 20 to 45 and with knee pain and radiographic knee osteoarthritis. Enrollment occurred between July 2012 and February 2016, and follow-up was completed September 2017.Interventions: Participants were randomized to high-intensity strength training (n = 127), low-intensity strength training (n = 126), or attention control (n = 124).Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes at the 18-month follow-up were Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) knee pain (0 best-20 worst; minimally clinically important difference [MCID, 2]) and knee joint compressive force, defined as the maximal tibiofemoral contact force exerted along the long axis of the tibia during walking (MCID, unknown).Results: Among 377 randomized participants (mean age, 65 years; 151 women [40%]), 320 (85%) completed the trial. Mean adjusted (sex, baseline BMI, baseline outcome values) WOMAC pain scores at the 18-month follow-up were not statistically significantly different between the high-intensity group and the control group (5.1 vs 4.9; adjusted difference, 0.2; 95% CI, -0.6 to 1.1; P = .61) or between the high-intensity and low-intensity groups (5.1 vs 4.4; adjusted difference, 0.7; 95% CI, -0.1 to 1.6; P = .08). Mean knee joint compressive forces were not statistically significantly different between the high-intensity group and the control group (2453 N vs 2512 N; adjusted difference, -58; 95% CI, -282 to 165 N; P = .61), or between the high-intensity and low-intensity groups (2453 N vs 2475 N; adjusted difference, -21; 95% CI, -235 to 193 N; P = .85). There were 87 nonserious adverse events (high-intensity, 53; low-intensity, 30; control, 4) and 13 serious adverse events unrelated to the study (high-intensity, 5; low-intensity, 3; control, 5).Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with knee osteoarthritis, high-intensity strength training compared with low-intensity strength training or an attention control did not significantly reduce knee pain or knee joint compressive forces at 18 months. The findings do not support the use of high-intensity strength training over low-intensity strength training or an attention control in adults with knee osteoarthritis.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01489462. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Knee osteoarthritis (OA), a common cause of chronic pain and disability, has biomechanical and inflammatory origins and is exacerbated by obesity.Objective: To determine whether a ≥10% reduction in body weight induced by diet, with or without exercise, would improve mechanistic and clinical outcomes more than exercise alone.Design, Setting, and Participants: Single-blind, 18-month, randomized clinical trial at Wake Forest University between July 2006 and April 2011. The diet and exercise interventions were center-based with options for the exercise groups to transition to a home-based program. Participants were 454 overweight and obese older community-dwelling adults (age ≥55 years with body mass index of 27-41) with pain and radiographic knee OA.Interventions: Intensive diet-induced weight loss plus exercise, intensive diet-induced weight loss, or exercise.Main Outcomes and Measures: Mechanistic primary outcomes: knee joint compressive force and plasma IL-6 levels; secondary clinical outcomes: self-reported pain (range, 0-20), function (range, 0-68), mobility, and health-related quality of life (range, 0-100).Results: Three hundred ninety-nine participants (88%) completed the study. Mean weight loss for diet + exercise participants was 10.6 kg (11.4%); for the diet group, 8.9 kg (9.5%); and for the exercise group, 1.8 kg (2.0%). After 18 months, knee compressive forces were lower in diet participants (mean, 2487 N; 95% CI, 2393 to 2581) compared with exercise participants (2687 N; 95% CI, 2590 to 2784, pairwise difference [Δ](exercise vs diet )= 200 N; 95% CI, 55 to 345; P = .007). Concentrations of IL-6 were lower in diet + exercise (2.7 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2.5 to 3.0) and diet participants (2.7 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2.4 to 3.0) compared with exercise participants (3.1 pg/mL; 95% CI, 2.9 to 3.4; Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise) = 0.39 pg/mL; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.81; P = .007; Δ(exercise vs diet )= 0.43 pg/mL; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.85, P = .006). The diet + exercise group had less pain (3.6; 95% CI, 3.2 to 4.1) and better function (14.1; 95% CI, 12.6 to 15.6) than both the diet group (4.8; 95% CI, 4.3 to 5.2) and exercise group (4.7; 95% CI, 4.2 to 5.1, Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise) = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.33 to 1.71; P(pain) = .004; 18.4; 95% CI, 16.9 to 19.9; Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise), 4.29; 95% CI, 2.07 to 6.50; P(function )< .001). The diet + exercise group (44.7; 95% CI, 43.4 to 46.0) also had better physical health-related quality of life scores than the exercise group (41.9; 95% CI, 40.5 to 43.2; Δ(exercise vs diet + exercise) = -2.81; 95% CI, -4.76 to -0.86; P = .005).Conclusions and Relevance: Among overweight and obese adults with knee OA, after 18 months, participants in the diet + exercise and diet groups had more weight loss and greater reductions in IL-6 levels than those in the exercise group; those in the diet group had greater reductions in knee compressive force than those in the exercise group.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00381290. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context Inconsistent findings from observational studies have continued the controversy over the effects of dietary fiber on colorectal cancer. Objective To evaluate the association between dietary fiber intake and risk of colorectal cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants From 13 prospective cohort studies included in the Pooling Project of Prospective Studies of Diet and Cancer, 725 628 men and women were followed up for 6 to 20 years across studies. Study- and sex-specific relative risks (RRs) were estimated with the Cox proportional hazards model and were subsequently pooled using a random-effects model. Main Outcome Measure Incident colorectal cancer. Results During 6 to 20 years of follow-up across studies, 8081 colorectal cancer cases were identified. For comparison of the highest vs lowest study- and sex-specific quintile of dietary fiber intake, a significant inverse association was found in the age-adjusted model (pooled RR = 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-0.92). However, the association was attenuated and no longer statistically significant after adjusting for other risk factors (pooled multivariate RR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86-1.03). In categorical analyses compared with dietary fiber intake of 10 to <15 g/d, the pooled multivariate RR was 1.18 (95% CI, 1.05-1.31) for less than 10 g/d (11% of the overall study population); and RR, 1.00 (95% CI, 0.85-1.17) for 30 or more g/d. Fiber intake from cereals, fruits, and vegetables was not associated with risk of colorectal cancer. The pooled multivariate RRs comparing the highest vs lowest study- and sex-specific quintile of dietary fiber intake were 1.00 (95% CI, 0.90-1.11) for colon cancer and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.72-1.01) for rectal cancer (P for common effects by tumor site = .07). Conclusions In this large pooled analysis, dietary fiber intake was inversely associated with risk of colorectal cancer in age-adjusted analyses. However, after accounting for other dietary risk factors, high dietary fiber intake was not associated with a reduced risk of colorectal cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents a study to determine whether elevation in serum antibody titers to Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) viral capsid antigen, nuclear antigens, and diffuse and restricted early antigen, as well as to cytomegalovirus precede the occurrence of multiple sclerosis (MS). Context; Objective; Design, setting, and subjects; Main outcome measure; Results; Conclusion that the results support a role of EBV in the etiology of MS.

Assesses the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus in women with a history of long or highly irregular menstrual cycles. Design and setting of the Nurses' Health Study II; Participation of 101,073 women; Main outcome measure; Results; Conclusion that women with this type of menstrual cycle have an increased risk for developing the disease that is not completely explained by obesity.

Reports on a study which examines the association between breast cancer and total and specific fruit and vegetable group intakes using standardized exposure definitions. Context; Data sources and study selection; Data extraction and synthesis; Conclusion.

Presents a study to assess the association between folate intake and risk of breast cancer and whether higher folate intake may reduce excess risk among women who consume alcohol. Design; Setting and participants; Main outcome measures; Results; Conclusions.

Presents a study to determine whether intakes of fat and fatty acids are associated with breast cancer. Design and setting; Participants; Main outcome measure; Results; Conclusion.

Examines whether tubal ligation and hysterectomy affect subsequent risk of ovarian cancer. Prospective cohort study with 12 years of followup involving female registered nurses; Observance of inverse association between tubal ligation and ovarian cancer which persisted after adjustment for age, oral contraceptive use, parity and other ovarian risk factors.

Addresses the hypothesis that dietary fat increases and fiber decreases the risk of breast cancer. Evidence against both an adverse influence of fat intake and a protective effect of fiber consumption by middle aged women on breast cancer incidence over eight years; Positive association between intake of animal fat and risk of colon cancer observed in many studies; Participants in the Nurse's Health Study; Details.

Presents a study to assess the risk of invasive breast cancer associated with total and beverage-specific alcohol consumption. Evaluation as to whether dietary and nondietary factors modify the association Data sources; Data extraction; Data synthesis; Conclusions.

The article presents insights on reports about the approach to the future of public health education. Topics covered include the report released by William Welch of Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and educator Wickliffe Rose which addressed the need for training of professionals in public health, the differences in underlying philosophies of the Welch-Rose report and that of professor Milton J. Rosenau's report and the emphasis placed on practical instruction in the Rosenau report.

Presents a response by David J. Hunter, Meir J. Stampfer, Graham A. Colditz, Frank E. Speizer, Walter C. Willett and J. Steven Morris to a letter to the editor about their article 'A Prospective Study of Selenium Status and Breast Cancer Risk,' in the 1990 issue of the 'Journal of the American Medical Association.'