Validation and utilisation of a digital version of the survey instrument for natural history, Aetiology and Prevalence of Patellofemoral pain studies (eSNAPPS)

Mohamed Yusuf; Paola Dey; Michael Callaghan; Nicola Relph; Phillip Gichuru; Susan Pinner; Jane Ashbrook; Joanne Ashman; Peter Goodwin; Ruth Macdonald; James Selfe

doi:10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.04.002

Validation and utilisation of a digital version of the survey instrument for natural history, Aetiology and Prevalence of Patellofemoral pain studies (eSNAPPS)

Mohamed Yusuf, Paola Dey, Michael Callaghan, Nicola Relph, Phillip Gichuru, Susan Pinner, Jane Ashbrook, Joanne Ashman, Peter Goodwin, Ruth Macdonald, James Selfe

Aston Medical School

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: This study validated the newly adapted electronic SNAPPS (eSNAPPS) against the original paper SNAPPS. Subsequently, the study estimated the prevalence of PFP in running participants and spectators attending three mass-participant running events in the United Kingdom by using the eSNAPPS tool. DESIGN: This study had two parts. Firstly, a validation of the original paper version of the SNAPPS tool. Secondly, if validation was achieved, eSNAPPS was used in a prevalence study. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of running participants and spectators aged 18-40 years attending the mass participation running events. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The 12-month prevalence of PFP. RESULTS: eSNAPPS was valid in identifying those with PFP (ICC 0.99 for Overall agreement, p < 0.0001). In the prevalence study, a total of 1080 running participants and spectators completed the eSNAPPS. The overall prevalence of PFP was 17.4% (95%CI: 15.2%, 19.8%); 20.5% of males (16.5, 24.9) and 15.7% of females (13.1, 18.7) had PFP. Prevalence was 17.4% (15.2, 19.8) in spectators and 16.7% in running participants (14.5, 19.0). CONCLUSION: The overall PFP prevalence in this study was slightly smaller than those previously reported in the literature. Findings also show that there were similar prevalence estimates in spectators and running participants.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	82-88
Number of pages	7
Journal	Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine
Volume	50
Early online date	21 Apr 2021
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.04.002
Publication status	Published - 1 Jul 2021

Bibliographical note

© 2021, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Funding: This project was funded by the Faculty of Health, Psychology and Social Care at Manchester Metropolitan University. The scheme was Research Excellence Award (code: 294300).

Keywords

Epidemiology
Knee pain
Patellofemoral pain
Prevalence

Access to Document

10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.04.002

Validation and utilisation of a digital version of the survey instrument for natural history (2)
© 2021, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
Accepted author manuscript, 648 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND 3.0

Cite this

Yusuf, M., Dey, P., Callaghan, M., Relph, N., Gichuru, P., Pinner, S., Ashbrook, J., Ashman, J., Goodwin, P., Macdonald, R., & Selfe, J. (2021). Validation and utilisation of a digital version of the survey instrument for natural history, Aetiology and Prevalence of Patellofemoral pain studies (eSNAPPS). Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine, 50, 82-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.04.002

@article{d60dfb9b185744c3876a064533c769d1,

title = "Validation and utilisation of a digital version of the survey instrument for natural history, Aetiology and Prevalence of Patellofemoral pain studies (eSNAPPS)",

abstract = "OBJECTIVE: This study validated the newly adapted electronic SNAPPS (eSNAPPS) against the original paper SNAPPS. Subsequently, the study estimated the prevalence of PFP in running participants and spectators attending three mass-participant running events in the United Kingdom by using the eSNAPPS tool. DESIGN: This study had two parts. Firstly, a validation of the original paper version of the SNAPPS tool. Secondly, if validation was achieved, eSNAPPS was used in a prevalence study. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of running participants and spectators aged 18-40 years attending the mass participation running events. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The 12-month prevalence of PFP. RESULTS: eSNAPPS was valid in identifying those with PFP (ICC 0.99 for Overall agreement, p < 0.0001). In the prevalence study, a total of 1080 running participants and spectators completed the eSNAPPS. The overall prevalence of PFP was 17.4% (95%CI: 15.2%, 19.8%); 20.5% of males (16.5, 24.9) and 15.7% of females (13.1, 18.7) had PFP. Prevalence was 17.4% (15.2, 19.8) in spectators and 16.7% in running participants (14.5, 19.0). CONCLUSION: The overall PFP prevalence in this study was slightly smaller than those previously reported in the literature. Findings also show that there were similar prevalence estimates in spectators and running participants.",

keywords = "Epidemiology, Knee pain, Patellofemoral pain, Prevalence",

author = "Mohamed Yusuf and Paola Dey and Michael Callaghan and Nicola Relph and Phillip Gichuru and Susan Pinner and Jane Ashbrook and Joanne Ashman and Peter Goodwin and Ruth Macdonald and James Selfe",

note = "{\textcopyright} 2021, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. Funding: This project was funded by the Faculty of Health, Psychology and Social Care at Manchester Metropolitan University. The scheme was Research Excellence Award (code: 294300).",

year = "2021",

month = jul,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.04.002",

language = "English",

volume = "50",

pages = "82--88",

}

Yusuf, M, Dey, P, Callaghan, M, Relph, N, Gichuru, P, Pinner, S, Ashbrook, J, Ashman, J, Goodwin, P, Macdonald, R & Selfe, J 2021, 'Validation and utilisation of a digital version of the survey instrument for natural history, Aetiology and Prevalence of Patellofemoral pain studies (eSNAPPS)', Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine, vol. 50, pp. 82-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.04.002

Validation and utilisation of a digital version of the survey instrument for natural history, Aetiology and Prevalence of Patellofemoral pain studies (eSNAPPS). / Yusuf, Mohamed; Dey, Paola; Callaghan, Michael et al.
In: Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine, Vol. 50, 01.07.2021, p. 82-88.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Validation and utilisation of a digital version of the survey instrument for natural history, Aetiology and Prevalence of Patellofemoral pain studies (eSNAPPS)

AU - Yusuf, Mohamed

AU - Dey, Paola

AU - Callaghan, Michael

AU - Relph, Nicola

AU - Gichuru, Phillip

AU - Pinner, Susan

AU - Ashbrook, Jane

AU - Ashman, Joanne

AU - Goodwin, Peter

AU - Macdonald, Ruth

AU - Selfe, James

N1 - © 2021, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/. Funding: This project was funded by the Faculty of Health, Psychology and Social Care at Manchester Metropolitan University. The scheme was Research Excellence Award (code: 294300).

PY - 2021/7/1

Y1 - 2021/7/1

N2 - OBJECTIVE: This study validated the newly adapted electronic SNAPPS (eSNAPPS) against the original paper SNAPPS. Subsequently, the study estimated the prevalence of PFP in running participants and spectators attending three mass-participant running events in the United Kingdom by using the eSNAPPS tool. DESIGN: This study had two parts. Firstly, a validation of the original paper version of the SNAPPS tool. Secondly, if validation was achieved, eSNAPPS was used in a prevalence study. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of running participants and spectators aged 18-40 years attending the mass participation running events. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The 12-month prevalence of PFP. RESULTS: eSNAPPS was valid in identifying those with PFP (ICC 0.99 for Overall agreement, p < 0.0001). In the prevalence study, a total of 1080 running participants and spectators completed the eSNAPPS. The overall prevalence of PFP was 17.4% (95%CI: 15.2%, 19.8%); 20.5% of males (16.5, 24.9) and 15.7% of females (13.1, 18.7) had PFP. Prevalence was 17.4% (15.2, 19.8) in spectators and 16.7% in running participants (14.5, 19.0). CONCLUSION: The overall PFP prevalence in this study was slightly smaller than those previously reported in the literature. Findings also show that there were similar prevalence estimates in spectators and running participants.

AB - OBJECTIVE: This study validated the newly adapted electronic SNAPPS (eSNAPPS) against the original paper SNAPPS. Subsequently, the study estimated the prevalence of PFP in running participants and spectators attending three mass-participant running events in the United Kingdom by using the eSNAPPS tool. DESIGN: This study had two parts. Firstly, a validation of the original paper version of the SNAPPS tool. Secondly, if validation was achieved, eSNAPPS was used in a prevalence study. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of running participants and spectators aged 18-40 years attending the mass participation running events. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The 12-month prevalence of PFP. RESULTS: eSNAPPS was valid in identifying those with PFP (ICC 0.99 for Overall agreement, p < 0.0001). In the prevalence study, a total of 1080 running participants and spectators completed the eSNAPPS. The overall prevalence of PFP was 17.4% (95%CI: 15.2%, 19.8%); 20.5% of males (16.5, 24.9) and 15.7% of females (13.1, 18.7) had PFP. Prevalence was 17.4% (15.2, 19.8) in spectators and 16.7% in running participants (14.5, 19.0). CONCLUSION: The overall PFP prevalence in this study was slightly smaller than those previously reported in the literature. Findings also show that there were similar prevalence estimates in spectators and running participants.

KW - Epidemiology

KW - Knee pain

KW - Patellofemoral pain

KW - Prevalence

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85108741999&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1466853X21000730?via%3Dihub

U2 - 10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.04.002

DO - 10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.04.002

M3 - Article

C2 - 33940555

AN - SCOPUS:85108741999

VL - 50

SP - 82

EP - 88

JO - Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine

JF - Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine

ER -

Yusuf M, Dey P, Callaghan M, Relph N, Gichuru P, Pinner S et al. Validation and utilisation of a digital version of the survey instrument for natural history, Aetiology and Prevalence of Patellofemoral pain studies (eSNAPPS). Physical therapy in sport : official journal of the Association of Chartered Physiotherapists in Sports Medicine. 2021 Jul 1;50:82-88. Epub 2021 Apr 21. doi: 10.1016/j.ptsp.2021.04.002

Validation and utilisation of a digital version of the survey instrument for natural history, Aetiology and Prevalence of Patellofemoral pain studies (eSNAPPS)

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this