We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Review
Extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus other therapeutic methods for chronic plantar fasciitis.
Foot and Ankle Surgery : Official Journal of the European Society of Foot and Ankle Surgeons 2020 January
BACKGROUND: To conduct a meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of general ESWT with that of other therapies and to assess its effectiveness in chronic plantar fasciitis.
METHODS: A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library for information from the earliest date of data collection to March 2018. Studies comparing the benefits and risks of extracorporeal shock wave therapy with those of other therapies for chronic plantar fasciitis were included. Statistical heterogeneity was quantitatively evaluated by a X2 test with the significance set as P<0.10 or I2 >50%.
RESULTS: Thirteen trials consisting of 1,185 patients were included (637 patients were treated with ESWT; 548 patients, with OT). The results showed that patients treated with ESWT had increased success or improvement rates, an increased modified Roles & Maudsley (RM) score, a reduction of pain scales, reduced return to work time, and fewer complications than patients treated with other therapy methods (P<0.1).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients who received other therapies for chronic plantar fasciitis, patients treated with ESWT responded better, had less complications and showed a clear difference in efficacy between ESWT and other therapy in chronic plantar fasciitis.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.
METHODS: A literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library for information from the earliest date of data collection to March 2018. Studies comparing the benefits and risks of extracorporeal shock wave therapy with those of other therapies for chronic plantar fasciitis were included. Statistical heterogeneity was quantitatively evaluated by a X2 test with the significance set as P<0.10 or I2 >50%.
RESULTS: Thirteen trials consisting of 1,185 patients were included (637 patients were treated with ESWT; 548 patients, with OT). The results showed that patients treated with ESWT had increased success or improvement rates, an increased modified Roles & Maudsley (RM) score, a reduction of pain scales, reduced return to work time, and fewer complications than patients treated with other therapy methods (P<0.1).
CONCLUSIONS: Compared with patients who received other therapies for chronic plantar fasciitis, patients treated with ESWT responded better, had less complications and showed a clear difference in efficacy between ESWT and other therapy in chronic plantar fasciitis.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Updated evidence on cardiovascular and renal effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists and combination therapy with SGLT2 inhibitors and finerenone: a narrative review and perspectives.Cardiovascular Diabetology 2024 November 15
Pharmacologic Treatment of Pulmonary Hypertension Due to Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: Are There More Arrows on Our Bow?Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 November 14
Guidelines for the Prevention, Diagnosis, and Management of Urinary Tract Infections in Pediatrics and Adults: A WikiGuidelines Group Consensus Statement.JAMA Network Open 2024 November 4
Autoantibodies in neuromuscular disorders: a review of their utility in clinical practice.Frontiers in Neurology 2024
Methods for determining optimal positive end-expiratory pressure in patients undergoing invasive mechanical ventilation: a scoping review.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 November 20
Cardiac Failure and Cardiogenic Shock: Insights Into Pathophysiology, Classification, and Hemodynamic Assessment.Curēus 2024 October
The Management of Interstitial Lung Disease in the ICU: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of Clinical Medicine 2024 November 6
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