OBJECTIVE: Extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) has been used as a therapeutic option for plantar fasciitis. The objective was to investigate the effect of ESWT over the plantar fascia thickness.
METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and SCOPUS databases were searched for randomized controlled trials evaluating the effect of ESWT in patients with plantar fasciitis, comparing ESWT with another treatment. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model and the generic inverse variance method. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were also carried out.
RESULTS: A total of 14 studies (867 participants) were included. ESWT significantly decreased plantar fascia thickness (weighted mean difference [WMD], -0.21 mm [95% CI -0.39, -0.02]; p = 0.03). No significant improvement in pain was observed (WMD, -0.51 cm [95% CI -1.04, 0.01]; p = 0.06) compared with non-surgical interventions.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that plantar fascia thickness is significantly decreased after ESWT intervention in patients with plantar fasciitis. However, pain relief was not significantly improved compared to other non-surgical interventions.

Heel pain is a common complaint in the population, leading to a limitation in daily activities and a poor quality of life. Chronic plantar fasciitis is the most common cause of heal pain. Despite its name, which suggests inflammation, the underlying process is rather a degenerative one. The clinical course is often chronic or relapsing, as a challenge to physicians to find the most effective therapeutically approach. First-line treatment consists of rest, shoe modification, orthosis and physiotherapy. Physical exercise is an important tool which can be combined with other therapeutic options. Medication is usually administered in acute cases, in the form of simple analgesics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or opioids, in different regimens. For chronic evolution, the use of NSAIDs is controversial. Second-line treatment includes extracorporeal shock wave therapy and corticosteroid local injection. New therapies have emerged, as autologous blood derivatives and prolotherapy, with growing evidence, to be included in clinical practice. The present review article discusses the therapeutic options for patients with chronic plantar fasciitis, to with an aim to shed light on the treatment strategies for this condition.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of extracorporeal shock waves versus corticosteroids injections on pain, thickness of plantar fascia and foot function in patients with plantar fasciitis. Secondarily, to assess the efficacy of radial and focused extracorporeal shock waves and the most appropriated intensity (high, medium or low).
METHODS: PubMed, SCOPUS, CINAHL and PEDro, until April 2024, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of extracorporeal shock waves versus corticosteroids injections on pain intensity and sensitivity, thickness of plantar fascia and foot function in patients with plantar fasciitis. Methodological quality and risk of bias were assessed using PEDro Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Pooled effect was calculated using the standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% confidence interval (95%CI).
RESULTS: Sixteen studies involving 1121 patients, showing a mean of 6 points in PEDro scale, were included. At three months, extracorporeal shock waves were better than corticosteroids injections in reducing pain (SMD -0.6; 95%CI -1.1 to -0.11) and thickness of the plantar fascia (SMD -0.4; 95%CI -0.8 to -0.01) and increasing foot function (SMD 0.27; 95%CI 0.12-0.44). At six months, extracorporeal shock waves are more effective in reducing pain (SMD -0.81; 95%CI -1.6 to -0.06) and increasing foot function (SMD 0.67; 95%CI 0.45-0.89). Local pain and slight erythema were the most frequent adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: Extracorporeal shock waves are a safe therapy, presenting more efficacy than corticosteroids injections in improving pain, thickness of plantar fascia and foot function at mid-term.

UNASSIGNED: Chronic foot pain, including conditions such as plantar fasciitis, presents a significant challenge to patients and healthcare providers. Traditional treatments often offer limited relief, prompting exploration of alternative therapies. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has emerged as a noninvasive brain stimulation technique with potential for alleviating chronic pain syndromes.
UNASSIGNED: A review was conducted following the JBI methodology and adhering to PRISMA guidelines. Searches were performed in databases including MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, Scopus, and PEDro, supplemented by grey literature sources and expert consultations. Studies were included if they investigated tDCS as an intervention for chronic foot pain, assessed its efficacy, safety, or mechanisms of action, and were published in English.
UNASSIGNED: A total of three papers were included in the review. The findings indicate that tDCS holds promise for managing chronic foot pain, including plantar fasciitis. Main results suggest significant reductions in pain intensity and improvements in related outcomes following tDCS treatment.
UNASSIGNED: This review underscores the potential of tDCS as an alternative therapy for severe lower-extremity pain, highlighting the need for further research to optimize its parameters and long-term effects. tDCS emerges as a promising neuromodulation approach for chronic foot pain management, offering insights for enhancing patient outcomes and quality of life.

UNASSIGNED: Plantar fasciitis (PF) is a common foot disorder with variability in treatment strategy. Two effective management techniques include platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections and extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT). The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the effectiveness of PRP vs ESWT in the management of PF.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic search was performed of PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar for randomized controlled trials comparing PRP to ESWT. Studies met inclusion criteria if mean and SDs for visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores and plantar fascia thickness (PFT) were reported. Mean differences were used to compare VAS pain score and PFT between PRP and ESWT.
UNASSIGNED: Six randomized controlled trials, comparing a total of 214 subjects in the PRP group and 218 subjects in the ESWT group, were analyzed. A significantly greater statistical improvement was seen in the PRP group in VAS pain (mean difference = -0.67 [95% CI -1.16, -0.18], P = .007) and plantar fascia thickness (PFT) (mean difference = -0.56 [95% CI -0.77, -0.35], P < .001).
UNASSIGNED: PRP had a statistically higher pain reduction than ESWT, but the difference does not reach clinical significance in this meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Plantar fasciitis (PF) is the most common cause of heel pain in adults. There are numerous non-operative treatments available including platelet rich plasma (PRP) injections. PPR has demonstrated effectiveness for a range of musculoskeletal conditions including plantar fasciitis.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of PRP to other conservative treatment options for the management of PF.
METHODS: A systematic search of PubMed and Google Scholar was performed for randomized control trials (RCT) comparing PRP to other treatment modalities. Studies met inclusion criteria if mean and standard deviations for visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, plantar fascia thickness (PFT), Foot Function Index (FFI), or American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Score were reported. Mean differences (MD) were used to compare VAS pain, PFT, FFI, and AOFAS between PRP and other treatments.
RESULTS: Twenty-one RCTs which altogether included 1356 patients were included in the meta-analysis. PRP demonstrated significantly greater improvements in VAS pain scores compared to extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) (SMD: 0.86; CI: [0.30, 1.41]; p = 0.002), corticosteroid injections (CSI) (SMD: 1.08; CI: [0.05, 2.11]; p = 0.04), and placebo (SMD: 3.42; CI: [2.53, 4.31]; p < 0.00001). In terms of FFI, no significant differences existed among PRP, ESWT, CSI, dextrose prolotherapy (DPT), and meridian trigger points (MTP) in enhancing foot functionality. However, PRP demonstrated a marked advantage over phonophoresis, showing a substantial improvement in FFI scores (SMD: 3.07, 95% CI: 2.34-3.81). PRP did not demonstrate superiority over ESWT, CSI, or MTP for improving PFT, but it was notably more effective than phonophoresis (SMD: 3.18, 95% CI: 2.43-3.94). PRP demonstrated significantly greater improvements in AOFAS scores over CSI (SMD: 3.31, CI: [1.35, 5.27], p = 0.0009) and placebo (SMD: 3.75; CI: [2.81, 4.70]; p < 0.00001).
CONCLUSIONS: PRP is more effective than CSI, ESWT, and placebo in reducing VAS and more effective than CSI and placebo in improving AOFAS. PRP did not demonstrate a consistent advantage across all outcome measures, such as PFT and FFI. These findings underscore the complexity of PF treatment and call for a more standardized approach to PRP preparation and outcome measurement.
METHODS: Level I Meta-Analysis.

Plantar fasciitis (PF) is a common musculoskeletal disease. Histologic findings of patients with PF showed mainly chronic degenerative processes rather than inflammation. In addition to mechanical factors, such as repetitive stress and reduced ankle dorsiflexion, PF is also linked to rheumatologic diseases and genetic factors. Ultrasound is becoming a standard imaging technique for assessing PF. Major sonographic findings included increased plantar fascia thickness and hypoechoic plantar fascia. In addition to traditional B-mode ultrasound, sonoelastography can also be utilized to diagnose PF. Ultrasound can also be used to guide therapeutic interventions. Over 80% of patients with PF improved under nonsurgical treatment. Treatment options for PF include physical therapy, modalities (laser, therapeutic ultrasound), extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT), injections, transcatheter arterial embolization, and surgery. For injections, corticosteroid was mostly used in the past but has been replaced gradually by other techniques such as platelet-rich plasma or dextrose prolotherapy. There is also more and more evidence about ESWT in treating PF. Surgery serves as an option for recalcitrant PF cases, and endoscopic fasciotomy seemed to have good outcomes. Ultrasound plays an important role in diagnosing of PF and evaluating the treatment effect, and the use of sonoelastography in addition to traditional B-mode ultrasound may help in the early detection of PF and assessment of the treatment effect.

UNASSIGNED: Plantar fasciitis (PF) is the most common cause of chronic heel pain among adults. Extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) is the recommended in the current guidelines, and the small needle-knife yields acceptable clinical effects for musculoskeletal pain.
UNASSIGNED: To systematically compare the efficacy of the small needle-knife versus ESWT for the treatment of PF.
UNASSIGNED: The present review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (i.e., \"PROSPERO\", CRD42023448813). Two of the authors searched electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the small needle-knife versus ESWT for the treatment of PF, and collected outcomes including curative effect, pain intensity, and function. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Handbook Risk of Bias tool and the quality of the RCTs was evaluated according to the Jadad Scale. The same authors independently performed data extraction from the included studies, which were imported into Review Manager version 5.4.1(Copenhagen: Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2020) for meta-analysis.
UNASSIGNED: The initial literature search retrieved 886 studies, of which 6 were eventually included in this study. Meta-analysis revealed no significant difference in curative effect (OR = 1.87; 95 % CI [0.80, 4.37], p = .15) nor short-term pain improvement (MD = 2.20; 95 % CI [-2.77, 7.16], p = .39) between the small needle-knife and ESWT. However, the small needle-knife may be more effective than ESWT for pain improvement in mid-term (MD = 9.11; 95 % CI [5.08, 13.15], p＜ .00001) and long-term follow-ups (MD = 10.71; 95 % CI [2.18, 19.25], p＜ .00001). Subgroup analysis revealed that the small needle-knife combined with a corticosteroid injection yielded a statistically significant difference in reduction of pain intensity at all follow-ups (MD = 4.84; 95 % CI [1.33, 8.36], p = .007; MD = 10.99; 95 % CI [8.30, 13.69], p＜ .00001; MD = 17.87; 95 % CI [15.26, 20.48], p＜ .00001). Meta-analysis revealed no statistical differences in short-term (MD = 1.34; 95 % CI [-3.19, 5.86], p = .56) and mid-term (MD = 2.75; 95 % CI [-1.21, 6.72], p = . 17) functional improvement between the needle-knife and ESWT groups. In a subgroup analysis of moderate-quality studies, the small needle-knife demonstrated a favorable effect on mid-term functional improvement (MD = 1.58; 95 % CI [0.52, 2.65], p = .004), with low heterogeneity (χ2 = 0.77, p = .038, I2 = 0 %). Conclusion: Pain reduction and functional improvement are essential for the treatment of PF. Therefore, treatment using the small needle-knife may be superior to ESWT. Results of this systematic review and meta-analysis may provide alternative treatment options for patients with PF as well as more reliable, evidence-based recommendations supporting use of the small needle-knife.

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: The study of the placebo effect is key to elucidate the \'real effect\' of conservative interventions for plantar fasciitis. The aim of this meta-analysis was to quantify the impact of placebo in the different conservative treatments of plantar fasciitis.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic literature review was performed on double-blind placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) according to PRISMA guidelines on PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science. The meta-analysis primary outcome was the 0-10 pain variation after placebo treatments analyzed at 1 week, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2.0 tool, while the overall quality of evidence was graded according to the GRADE guidelines.
UNASSIGNED: The placebo effect for conservative treatments was studied in 42 double-blind RCTs on 1724 patients. The meta-analysis of VAS pain showed a statistically significant improvement after placebo administration of 2.13/10 points (P < 0.001), being highest at 12 months with 2.79/10 points (P < 0.001). The improvement of the placebo groups was higher in the extracorporeal shock wave therapy studies compared to the injection studies (2.59 vs 1.78; P = 0.05). Eight studies had a low risk of bias, 23 studies had \'some concerns,\' and 4 studies had a high risk of bias. The GRADE evaluation showed an overall high quality of evidence.
UNASSIGNED: This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that the placebo effect represents an important component of all conservative approaches to treat plantar fasciitis. This effect is statistically and clinically significant, increases over time, and depends on the type of conservative treatment applied to address plantar fasciitis.