Trial reportBrazilian journal of physical therapy
Functional impact of gluteal tendinopathy: A secondary cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from the LEAP randomised clinical trial.
Trial report in Brazilian journal of physical therapy. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGluteal tendinopathy (GT) can substantially limit function, although limited information exists on the range of activities affected by GT or the severity of the impact.
objectiveTo investigate the type and degree of functional impact in participants with GT.
methodsA cross-sectional secondary analysis of baseline Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) data from the multi-centre LatErAl hip Pain (LEAP) randomised clinical trial was performed. Two hundred and four community-dwelling participants (82% female, mean age 55(9) years) were recruited, with GT confirmed through clinical and imaging assessment. Participants nominated and rated three activities most impacted by their condition (0=unable to perform, 10=pre-condition ability). Activities - categorised by type - and degree of impact (mean PSFS score) along with the influence of sex and physical activity were analysed by general linear model. Physical activity levels were derived from the Active Australia Survey.
resultsData were available for 201 (99%) participants. They nominated 585 PSFS activities over 34 categories. The three most frequently nominated activities were walking (68%), running (27%), and sitting (27%). One hundred and fifty-four (77%) participants were moderately/highly physically active. The mean PSFS score was 4.6(1.9) - with no difference between sexes or physical activity levels (p>0.3). The lowest scores (greatest impact) were for court/field sports (2.5(2.0)), jumping (2.7(2.1)), and martial arts (3.0(2.2)).
conclusionsGT is characterised by approximately 50% impairment of a range of daily activities (e.g., walking, sitting). PSFS activities nominated by patients should be considered in treatment and measuring outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.