We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Combination Therapy Versus Exercise and Orthotic Support in the Management of Pain in Plantar Fasciitis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Foot & Ankle International 2018 April
BACKGROUND: This study aimed at estimating the effectiveness of two commonly used modalities-extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) and low-level laser therapy (LLLT)-each combined with usual care (exercises and orthotic supports) in comparison to only usual care to relieve pain in patients with plantar fasciitis (PF).
METHODS: Participants with PF were randomly allocated into 3 groups: ESWT (n = 25), LLLT (n = 24), and control (n = 17). All participants received a home exercise program with orthotic support. The ESWT group received 2000 shock waves with 0.02 mJ/mm2 for 3 sessions, once a week; LLLT group received gallium-aluminum-arsenide laser with 850 nm wavelength for 10 sessions, 3 times a week. Pain was measured by Foot Function Index-pain subscale (FFI-p) and Numerical Rating Scale for pain (NRS-p). The scores were recorded at baseline, third week, and third month after the treatment. Analysis was performed using repeated measures ANOVA.
RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in pain over the 3 months in all groups on both FFI-p ( P < .001) and NRS-p ( P < .001). In NRS-p, LLLT group had significantly lower pain than ESWT ( P = .002) at the third week and control ( P = .043) and ESWT ( P = .003) at third month. In FFI-p total score, ESWT group had higher pain than LLLT ( P = .003) and control ( P = .035) groups at third week and LLLT ( P = .010) group at third month.
CONCLUSION: When LLLT and ESWT were combined with usual care, LLLT was found to be more effective than ESWT in reducing pain in PF at short-term follow-up.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, comparative study.
METHODS: Participants with PF were randomly allocated into 3 groups: ESWT (n = 25), LLLT (n = 24), and control (n = 17). All participants received a home exercise program with orthotic support. The ESWT group received 2000 shock waves with 0.02 mJ/mm2 for 3 sessions, once a week; LLLT group received gallium-aluminum-arsenide laser with 850 nm wavelength for 10 sessions, 3 times a week. Pain was measured by Foot Function Index-pain subscale (FFI-p) and Numerical Rating Scale for pain (NRS-p). The scores were recorded at baseline, third week, and third month after the treatment. Analysis was performed using repeated measures ANOVA.
RESULTS: There was a significant improvement in pain over the 3 months in all groups on both FFI-p ( P < .001) and NRS-p ( P < .001). In NRS-p, LLLT group had significantly lower pain than ESWT ( P = .002) at the third week and control ( P = .043) and ESWT ( P = .003) at third month. In FFI-p total score, ESWT group had higher pain than LLLT ( P = .003) and control ( P = .035) groups at third week and LLLT ( P = .010) group at third month.
CONCLUSION: When LLLT and ESWT were combined with usual care, LLLT was found to be more effective than ESWT in reducing pain in PF at short-term follow-up.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, comparative study.
Full text links
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app