Conservative management following patellar dislocation: a level I systematic review

Table 1 Analysis of the methodological quality of the selected studies—PeDRO (n = 7)

References	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	Total
Camanho et al. [38]	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	No	3
Bitar et al. [39]	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	4
Smith et al. [40]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	7
Rood et al. [21]	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	5
Straume‑Nasheim et al. [41]	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	5
Honkonen et al. [42]	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	4
Petri et al. [20]	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	5

1. Eligibility criteria have been specified
2. Subjects were randomly assigned to groups
3. The distribution of subjects was blind
4. Initially, the groups were similar with regard to the most important prognostic indicators
5. All subjects participated blindly in the study
6. All physiotherapists who administered the therapy did so blindly
7. All evaluators who measured at least one key outcome did so blindly
8. Measurements of at least one key outcome were obtained in more than 85% of subjects initially assigned to groups
9. All subjects from whom outcome measurements were presented received the treatment or control condition as per the distribution or, when this was not the case, data analysis was performed for at least one of the key outcomes by “intent to treat”
10. The results of inter-group statistical comparisons were described for at least one key outcome
11. The study has both precision measures and variability measures for at least one key outcome

ISSN: 1749-799X