Injected corticosteroids for treating plantar heel pain in adults

A Novel Combination Strategy of Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Radiofrequency Ablation and Corticosteroid Injection for Treating Recalcitrant Plantar Fasciitis: A Retrospective Comparison Study

INTRODUCTION

The best treatment yielding clinical benefits was still equivocal and controversial for the treatment of recalcitrant plantar fasciitis (PF). This study aimed to propose a novel combination strategy of ultrasound-guided percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and corticosteroid injection (CI) for recalcitrant PF, and to compare its therapeutic effects with CI alone and continued conservative management.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients with recalcitrant PF who underwent combined strategy (RFA + CI), CI alone, and continue conservative treatment at our institution between October 2021 and February 2023. The technical pearls were described elaborately. A comparison of demographic data and clinical outcomes, including visual analog scale (VAS), Ankle-Hindfoot Scale (AOFAS-AHS), and plantar fascia thickness, were conducted among the three groups.

RESULTS

Seventy-one eligible patients were enrolled in this study, with 17 in the combined strategy group, 25 in the CI group, and 29 in the continued conservative treatment group. Both the combined strategy group and the CI group showed significant improvements in VAS scores, AOFAS-AHS scores, and significant reductions in plantar fascia thickness during the 12-month follow-up period compared to those preoperatively (P < 0.05). The combined strategy group achieved comparable immediate pain relief to the CI group after the intervention ([25.7 ± 15.7] vs. [20.6 ± 17.6], P = 0.850). However, the combined strategy group demonstrated superior improvement in symptom and function compared to the CI group at the 3-month (VAS: [21.9 ± 13.5] vs. [39.6 ± 20.4]; AOFAS-AHS: [77.9 ± 12.4] vs. [60.5 ± 17.4], P < 0.05) and 12-month follow-up (VAS: [15.7 ± 12.0] vs. [56.8 ± 17.5]; AOFAS-AHS: [84.5 ± 10.7] vs. [53.8 ± 12.4], P < 0.05). Obvious adverse effects or complications were not identified in either group, while two cases (11.8%) in the combined strategy group and five cases (20.0%) in the CI group experienced unsatisfactory symptom remission.

CONCLUSIONS

We introduced and detailed a novel combination strategy involving ultrasound-guided percutaneous RFA and CI for treating recalcitrant PF. The strategy is both effective and safe in alleviating pain and enhancing function throughout the entire treatment course.

Effect of corticosteroids over plantar fascia thickness in plantar fasciitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Corticosteroid injections have been typically used for the management of plantar fasciitis with apparently good clinical outcomes; however, there is no information of the effect of corticosteroids on the thickness of the plantar fascia which is typically altered in this pathology. We aimed determine whether treatment with corticosteroid injections induces plantar fascia thickness changes in plantar fasciitis.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) reporting the use of corticosteroid injection to treat plantar fasciitis to July 2022. Studies must have reported plantar fascia thickness measurement. The risk of bias in all studies was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model and the generic inverse variance method.

RESULTS

Data from 17 RCT (including 1109 subjects) were collected. The follow-up period ranged from one to six months. Most studies measured the thickness of the plantar fascia at the insertion into the calcaneus using ultrasound. Pooled analysis revealed that corticosteroid injections had no significant effect on plantar fascia thickness (weighted mean differences [WMD], 0.06 mm [95% CI: -0.17, 0.29]; p = 0.61) or pain relief (WMD, 0.12 cm [95% CI: -0.36, 0.61]; p = 0.62) above active controls.

CONCLUSION

Corticosteroid injections do not perform better than other common interventions in terms of a decrease of plantar fascia thickness and pain relief for plantar fasciitis.

Common Painful Foot and Ankle Conditions: A Review

Importance

Morton neuroma, plantar fasciitis, and Achilles tendinopathy are foot and ankle conditions that are associated with pain and disability, but they can respond to nonoperative treatment.

Observations

Morton neuroma, consisting of interdigital neuronal thickening and fibrosis, is characterized by burning pain in the ball of the foot and numbness or burning pain that may radiate to the affected toes (commonly the third and fourth toes). First-line nonoperative therapy consists of reducing activities that cause pain, orthotics, and interdigital corticosteroid injection; however, approximately 30% of patients may not respond to conservative treatment. Plantar fasciitis accounts for more than 1 million patient visits per year in the US and typically presents with plantar heel pain. Fifteen years after diagnosis, approximately 44% of patients continue to have pain. First-line nonoperative therapy includes stretching of the plantar fascia and foot orthotics, followed by extracorporeal shockwave therapy, corticosteroid injection, or platelet-rich plasma injection. Midportion Achilles tendinopathy presents with pain approximately 2 to 6 cm proximal to the Achilles insertion on the heel. The primary nonoperative treatment involves eccentric strengthening exercises, but extracorporeal shockwave therapy may be used.

Conclusions and Relevance

Morton neuroma, plantar fasciitis, and Achilles tendinopathy are painful foot and ankle conditions. First-line therapies are activity restriction, orthotics, and corticosteroid injection for Morton neuroma; stretching and foot orthotics for plantar fasciitis; and eccentric strengthening exercises for Achilles tendinopathy.

Efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies on pain intensity and disability for plantar fasciitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies on pain intensity and disability for plantar fasciitis.

DESIGN

Systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

DATA SOURCES

AMED, MEDLINE, PEDro, Cochrane, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, EMBASE and PsycINFO without language or date restrictions up to 3 February 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

RCTs that evaluated the efficacy of any pharmacological and non-pharmacological therapies compared with control (placebo, sham, waiting list or no intervention) on pain intensity and disability in people with plantar fasciitis. Two reviewers independently screened eligible trials, extracted data, assessed the methodological quality of included trials and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework. Mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs were reported.

RESULTS

Seventeen different therapies investigated in 28 trials were included in the quantitative analysis. For non-pharmacological therapies, moderate certainty evidence showed short-term effects of customised orthoses on pain intensity when compared with control (MD of -12.0 points (95% CI -17.1 to -7.0) on a 0-100 scale). Low certainty evidence showed short-term effects of taping on pain intensity (-21.3 (95% CI -38.6 to -4.0)). Long-term effects and effects on disability are still uncertain. For pharmacological therapies, low to very low quality evidence from few trials with small samples was inconclusive and supports that high-quality trials are needed.

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality and low-quality evidence demonstrates customised orthoses and taping, respectively, reduce pain intensity in the short term in patients with plantar fasciitis.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021224416.

Prolotherapy Versus Phonophoresis and Corticosteroid Injections for the Treatment of Plantar Fasciitis: A Randomized, Double-Blind Clinical Trial

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of prolotherapy with phonophoresis and steroid injection in patients with plantar fasciitis (PF). One hundred forty-six patients with PF were randomly divided into prolotherapy, phonophoresis, and injection groups. The treatment method to be applied to them was determined by drawing lots of equal numbers of papers with "Prolotherapy," "Corticosteroid," and "Phonophoress" written on it among those who accepted to be treated. Patients were evaluated using heel sensitivity index (HSI), visual analog scale (VAS), foot function index (FFI), and Short Form (SF)-36 at baseline, first and third months after the therapy. Plantar fascia thickness (PFT) was measured by ultrasonography (USG) at baseline, first and third months after the therapy. Statistically significant improvements were found in all parameters at 1 and 3 months after treatment in all groups (p < .05). There was no significant difference between VAS and FFI scores between the 3 groups (p > .05). Improvement in the HSI (p = .021) and SF-36 general health (GH) subscales at the third month after treatment in the prolotherapy group was significantly better at the first and third months compared to the other groups (p = .033 and p < .01). No complications were observed in any of the patients. Our study results suggest that prolotherapy, phonophoresis, and steroid injection are beneficial as safe treatment modalities in the early period of PF treatment. The improvement of HSI and SF-36 GH subscale lasts longer with prolotherapy, but ultrasonographic findings do not change in the third month of these treatment applications.

Does a corticosteroid injection plus exercise or exercise alone add to the effect of patient advice and a heel cup for patients with plantar fasciopathy? A randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of patient advice plus heel cup alone (PA) versus PA and lower limb exercise (PAX) versus PAX plus corticosteroid injection (PAXI) to improve self-reported pain in patients with plantar fasciopathy.

METHODS

We recruited 180 adults with plantar fasciopathy confirmed by ultrasonography for this prospectively registered three-armed, randomised, single-blinded superiority trial. Patients were randomly allocated to PA (n=62), PA plus self-dosed lower limb heavy-slow resistance training consisting of heel raises (PAX) (n=59), or PAX plus an ultrasound-guided injection of 1 mL triamcinolone 20 mg/mL (PAXI) (n=59). The primary outcome was changed in the pain domain of the Foot Health Status Questionnaire (ranging from 0 'worst' to 100 'best') from baseline to the 12-week follow-up. The minimal important difference in the pain domain is 14.1 points. The outcome was collected at baseline and at 4, 12, 26, and 52 weeks.

RESULTS

The primary analysis found a statistically significant difference between PA and PAXI after 12 weeks favouring PAXI (adjusted mean difference: -9.1 (95% CI -16.8 to -1.3; p=0.023)) and over 52 weeks (adjusted mean difference: -5.2 (95% CI -10.4 to -0.1; p=0.045)). At no follow-up did the mean difference between groups exceed the pre-specified minimal important difference. No statistically significant difference was found between PAX and PAXI or between PA and PAX at any time.

CONCLUSION

No clinically relevant between-group differences were found after 12 weeks. The results indicate that combining a corticosteroid injection with exercise is not superior to exercise or no exercise.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03804008.

Effect of platelet-rich plasma versus steroid injection in plantar fasciitis: a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Plantar fasciitis (PF) is a common orthopaedic problem, with heel pain worsening the quality of life. Although steroid injection is often used if the conservative treatment fails, Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) injection is gaining popularity due to its safety and long-lasting effect. However, the effect of PRP versus steroid injection in PF has not been studied yet in Nepal. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the effect of PRP compared with steroid injection in the treatment of PF.

METHODS

This study was a single-center, hospital-based, open-label, parallel-group randomized clinical trial to compare the effect of PRP injection with steroid injection in plantar fasciitis between August 2020 and March 2022. A total of 90 randomly selected participants aged 18 to 60 years suffering from plantar fasciitis with failed conservative treatment were intervened. The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scoring system were used to evaluate functional mobility and pain before and after the intervention for three and six months, respectively. Statistical analyses were performed using a Student's two-sample t-test. P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The PRP injection showed a better outcome than the steroid injection in six months follow-up. The mean (± SD) VAS score was significantly decreased in the PRP group (1.97 + 1.13) than in the steroid group (2.71 ± 0.94) with the group difference of -0.73 (95% CI: -1.18 to -0.28) at six months. Similarly, there was a significant increase in the AOFAS scores in the PRP group (86.04 ± 7.45) compared to the steroid group (81.23 ± 9.60) at six months of follow-up with a group difference of 4.80 (95% CI: 1.15 to 8.45). There was also a significant reduction of plantar fascia thickness in the PRP group compared to that of the steroid group (3.53 ± 0.81 versus 4.58 ± 1.02) at six months of follow-up with the group difference of -1.04 (95% CI: -1.44 to -0.65).

CONCLUSION

The PRP injection showed better outcomes than steroid injection in plantar fasciitis treatment over the course of six months. Further research with a larger population and longer follow-up than six months is needed to generalize the findings and their long-term efficacy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT04985396. First registered on 02 August 2021. ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04985396 ).

A Prospective Study Comparing the Efficacy of Local Injection of Platelet-Rich Plasma (PRP) vs Methylprednisolone in Plantar Fasciitis

Introduction

Plantar fasciitis is a common musculoskeletal problem in Orthopaedic practice. Heel pain caused due to plantar fasciitis, if persistent, can cause distress to the patient, so the correct intervention at the right time is needed. Plantar fasciitis is also common in the rural population.

Objectives

To compare the efficacy of local injection of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and corticosteroid (CS) (methylprednisolone) in patients with chronic plantar fasciitis, and to evaluate the safety, side effect and complications of two different modalities of treatment.

Materials and methods

The study period was between August 2018 and September 2020. After obtaining proper written consent, 110 patients, who were above the age of 18 years and suffering from plantar fasciitis for more than three months, were included in the study. The patient characteristics including gender, age, weight, history of heel pain, duration of symptoms and types of prior treatment were noted. All the 110 patients were subjected to four parameter assessments before administration of the PRP/CS injections. Out of the 110 patients, 55 patients received PRP injection and 55 received CS - 2 ml (40 mg) methylprednisolone with 2 ml of sterile water injections. Post administration of injections, the patients' clinical, radiological, subjective and functional outcomes were assessed at the first, third and sixth month by using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Foot and Ankle Outcome Instrument Core Scale (FAI), Roles and Maudsley Scores (RMS), American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) ankle-hind foot scale and ultrasonogram of plantar fascia thickness.

Discussion

In this study, 110 patients were screened and evaluated. Out of these 110 patients, five patients who received PRP and five who received CS were lost for follow-up. Out of the 110 patients, 59 were females and 41 were males. The majority of the patients were in the BMI range of 18.5 to 24.9, with a mean BMI of 23.6. Comparing the results in both the groups reflected an improvement in the group of patients who received PRP injections. Two patients had post-operative complications (superficial infection) in the PRP injection group, while 10 patients had post-procedure complications (five patients developed superficial infections, three patients developed skin depigmentation, and two patients had atrophy of fat pad) in the corticosteroid injections (CSI) group. Infections subsided in all the patients as observed during subsequent follow-up.

Conclusion

This study shows that PRP administration is a good method of managing patients suffering from chronic plantar fasciitis, presenting with some discomfort following activity, with more than three months of symptoms and with a VAS score of more than 6 and plantar fascia thickness of 5 mm and failed conservative management. This is evidenced by a comparison of AOFAS, FAI score and thickness of plantar fascia using an ultrasonogram before and after the procedure. This study reflects better treatment outcomes with PRP injection compared to local steroid infiltration. This is the largest series of cases studied compared to other previously available studies in the literature. PRP injections may thus be used as a superior alternative to the already available treatments for chronic heel pain.

Case report: Baxter's nerve radiofrequency in patient with plantar fasciitis nonresponsive to conventional treatment

Plantar fasciitis is recognized as the leading cause of talalgia worldwide. In the vast majority of cases it can be controlled with the use of appropriate footwear, stretching exercises and changes in the sport activity, while a few cases require infiltrations or surgical interventions. The latter puts the patient at greater risk, and is reserved for the most severe cases. We propose using pulsed radiofrequency ablation of Baxter's nerve to treat this painful symptom in patients who do not respond adequately to conventional treatment. We present the case of a patient with refractory plantar fasciitis in whom surgery had been ruled out. The patient underwent pulsed radiofrequency treatment with satisfactory results in the short and medium term.

The Efficacy of Acupuncture on Foot and Ankle for Pain Intensity, Functional Status, and General Quality of Life in Adults: A Systematic Review

Objective: To assess the effect of acupuncture on foot and ankle pain intensity, functional status, quality of life, and incidence of adverse events in adults. Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were obtained from a systematic search of 6 major English databases, and a manual search of relevant systematic reviews using Google Scholar. RCTs that compared acupuncture with various forms of sham acupuncture, nonactive and waitlist controls for pain intensity, functional status, and general quality of life were included. Study screening, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and quality assessment were all performed independently. A narrative synthesis was performed when quantitative pooling was inappropriate. Results: Four RCTs were included, encompassing a total of 211 participants. Due to clinical heterogeneity for all outcomes, quantitative analysis was not appropriate. Our Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation rated all outcomes to have either low or very low quality of evidence. With low-quality evidence, acupuncture was shown to be efficacious for participants with plantar fasciitis for pain relief and functional status improvement at short- and intermediate-term follow-ups. Acupuncture was also shown to be efficacious for participants with Achilles tendinopathy for pain relief at short- and intermediate-term follow-ups. No adverse events were reported. Conclusion: There is some evidence to suggest acupuncture to be a safe and efficacious treatment for relieving pain and improving functional status for the foot and ankle. The results of this systematic review should be interpreted with caution due to the limited evidence. Future research should take into consideration the findings of this systematic review.

A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews on the Epidemiology, Evaluation, and Treatment of Plantar Fasciitis

The number of systematic review and meta-analyses on plantar fasciitis is expanding. The purpose of this review was to provide a comprehensive summary of reviews on the topic pertaining to plantar fasciitis, identify any conflicting and inconsistent results, and propose future research direction. A qualitative review of all systematic reviews and meta-analyses related to plantar fasciitis up to February 2021 was performed using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Database. A total of 1052 articles were initially identified and 96 met the inclusion criteria. Included articles were summarized and divided into the following topics: epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment. While the majority of reviews had high level of heterogeneity and included a small number of studies, there was general consensus on certain topics, such as BMI as a risk factor for plantar fasciitis and extracorporeal shockwave therapy as an effective mode of therapy. A qualitative summary of systematic reviews and meta-analyses published on plantar fasciitis provides a single source of updated information for clinicians. Evidence on topics such as the epidemiology, exercise therapy, or cost-effectiveness of treatment options for plantar fasciitis are lacking and warrant future research.

Case report: Baxteŕs nerve radiofrequency in patient with plantar fasciitis nonresponsive to conventional treatment

Plantar fasciitis is recognized as the leading cause of talalgia worldwide. In the vast majority of cases it can be controlled with the use of appropriate footwear, stretching exercises and changes in the sport activity, while a few cases require infiltrations or surgical interventions. The latter puts the patient at greater risk, and is reserved for the most severe cases. We propose using pulsed radiofrequency ablation of Baxter's nerve to treat this painful symptom in patients who do not respond adequately to conventional treatment. We present the case of a patient with refractory plantar fasciitis in whom surgery had been ruled out. The patient underwent pulsed radiofrequency treatment with satisfactory results in the short and medium term.

Stretching and relaxing the plantar fascia may change plantar fascia thickness but not pressure pain thresholds: a cross-sectional study of patients with plantar fasciopathy

Background

Despite the established relevance of ultrasonography and assessment of pressure pain thresholds in patients with plantar fasciopathy, patient and probe positioning has been mostly ignored and are not necessarily reported in research. The primary aim of this study was to compare plantar fascia thickness in stretched and relaxed positions in patients with plantar fasciopathy. The secondary aim was to compare plantar heel pressure pain thresholds in these positions.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we measured the plantar fascia thickness with ultrasonography, and localised pressure pain thresholds using pressure algometry of 20 patients with plantar fasciopathy. These were assessed bilaterally, with the plantar fascia in both a stretched and relaxed position. In the stretched position, toes were maximally dorsiflexed, while in the relaxed position participants’ feet were hanging freely over the end of the table.

Results

The plantar fascia of the most symptomatic foot was significantly thicker when stretched compared with the relaxed position (sagittal: mean difference 0.2 mm, 95%CI: 0.1–0.4, P = 0.013; frontal: mean difference − 0.27, 95%CI: − 0.49 to − 0.06, P = 0.014). The plantar fascia was significantly thinner in the frontal plane compared with the sagittal plane in both positions (stretched: mean difference − 0.2 mm, 95%CI: − 0.42 to − 0.03, P = 0.025; relaxed: mean difference − 0.3 mm, 95%CI:-0.49 to − 0.08, P = 0.008). There was no difference between pressure pain thresholds in stretched or relaxed positions in either foot (P > 0.4).

Conclusions

The plantar fascia was significantly thicker in a stretched compared with a relaxed position and in the sagittal compared with the frontal plane, but differences were smaller than the standard deviation. Pressure pain thresholds were not different between the positions. These results highlight the importance of how ultrasonography is performed and reported in research to allow for replication.

Trial registration

The study was pre-registered September 25th, 2017 on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03291665).

Efficacy of local injection therapy for heel pain in rheumatic inflammatory diseases: A systematic review

Heel pain or achillodynia is one of the most common manifestations in patients with rheumatic inflammatory diseases (RID) and particularly spondyloarthritis (SpA). It can be associated with inflammation at the bone insertion of tendon, ligament, bursa or fascia. However, treatment is still a challenge for rheumatologists. Several findings highlighted the proven benefit of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), and recently, tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-α inhibitors. However, only limited data about the efficacy of local therapy such as glucocorticoid and anti-TNF injections are available. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy and safety of local therapies in heel pain and to make recommendations for further studies. Five studies discussing the effectiveness of local treatments of heel pain in RID were included. All studies recognized that the ultrasonography (US)-guided local corticosteroid or etanercept injections were effective and safe modalities for the treatment of inflammatory heel enthesitis, tendinitis, and retrocalcaneal bursitis (RCB) in patients with RID. Pain relief at the local site was associated with a reversion of the acute inflammatory changes in the heel. Furthermore, US-guided injection in RCB with a lateral approach was beneficial in terms of preventing side effects.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Versus Corticosteroids for Plantar Fasciitis: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background:

Plantar fasciitis is the most common cause of plantar heel pain. Several recent randomized control trials (RCTs) have been published comparing the use of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and corticosteroids (CSs) for the treatment of plantar fasciitis.

Purpose:

To perform a systematic review of RCTs to compare whether PRP or CS injections result in decreased pain levels and improved patient outcomes in the treatment of plantar fasciitis.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.

Methods:

Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were screened according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines to identify RCTs comparing PRP and CS injections for plantar fasciitis. The visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores and the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) scores were compared between groups at 1, 1.5, 3, 6, and 12 months, where possible. Statistical analysis was performed using RevMan, and P < .05 was considered to be statistically significant.

Results:

A total of 9 RCTs were identified comparing 239 patients with PRP with 240 patients with CS injections. At the follow-up time points, including 1-1.5, 3, 6, and 12 months, there were statistically significant differences in VAS scores in favor of PRP (P = .004, P < .00001, P < .00001, and P < .00001, respectively). At 1 and 3 months, there was no difference in AOFAS scores (P = .76 and P = .35, respectively). However, at 6 and 12 months, there was a difference in AOFAS scores in favor of PRP (P < .00001 and P < .00001, respectively).

Conclusion:

In patients with chronic plantar fasciitis, the current clinical evidence suggests that PRP may lead to a greater improvement in pain and functional outcome over CS injections.

Foot exercise plus education versus wait and see for the treatment of plantar heel pain (FEET trial): a protocol for a feasibility study

Background

Plantar heel pain (PHP) is present in a wide range of individuals and creates significant burden to quality of life and participation in physical activity. The high recurrence rates and persistence of PHP suggests current management options may not address all potentially modifiable factors associated with the condition. Reports of intrinsic foot muscle (IFM) atrophy in individuals with PHP, together with biomechanical evidence of their important contribution to optimal foot function, suggests that an intervention focused on IFM training may be beneficial in managing PHP. We will test the feasibility of a prospective, assessor-blinded, parallel-group, randomised clinical trial that compares foot exercise plus education to brief advice in individuals with PHP.

Methods

Twenty participants with PHP will be randomly allocated to one of two groups for a 12-week intervention period: (i) foot exercise plus education, or (ii) brief advice. The foot exercise plus education group will attend eight sessions with a physiotherapist and receive detailed education on self-management strategies as well as a progressive exercise program for the IFMs. The brief advice group will attend one session with a physiotherapist and receive brief information about self-management strategies and reassurance. Outcome measures will be obtained at baseline and the primary end-point of 12 weeks. Primary outcomes will be the feasibility of conducting a full-scale randomised clinical trial (RCT), and the credibility and acceptability of the foot exercise plus education intervention. Secondary outcomes will explore treatment effects, which will consist of pain, physical function, physical activity level, pain self-efficacy, perceived treatment effect, magnetic resonance and ultrasound image measurement of IFM morphology, ultrasound imaging measurement of plantar fascia thickness, IFM motor performance, foot posture, foot mobility, ankle dorsiflexion range of motion, toe flexor and plantar flexor strength/endurance.

Discussion

To reduce the burden of PHP on individuals and society, there is a need to establish effective treatments that are feasible and accepted by patients and health professionals. This trial will be the first to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a full-scale RCT, as well as the credibility, acceptability, and treatment effects, of education and foot exercise for PHP. The findings of this study will inform the development of a full-scale RCT.

Trial registration

The trial protocol was prospectively registered with the Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12619000987167) on 11th July 2019.

Ultrasound-Guided Injection of High Molecular Weight Hyaluronic Acid versus Corticosteroid in Management of Plantar Fasciitis: A 24-Week Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Plantar fasciitis (PF) is the leading cause of heel pain in adults. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of hyaluronic acid (HA) injection in reducing the symptoms of PF, compared with corticosteroid (CS) injection as a conventional treatment.

METHODS

In this triple-blind, randomized, clinical trial, 75 patients who had the symptoms of PF for at least 3 months were randomly divided into two groups of 38 and 37 individuals. Then, each patient received either a single injection of high molecular weight (>2000 kDa) HA (1 mL HA 20 mg + 1 mL lidocaine 2%) or CS (1 mL methylprednisolone 40 mg + 1 mL lidocaine 2%) under the ultrasonography (US) guidance. Visual analog scale (VAS), foot ankle ability index (FAAI), pressure pain threshold (PPT), functional foot index (FFI), and plantar fascia thickness (PFT) were measured using US at baseline, 6 weeks and 24 weeks after the injection. Eventually, at the end of the treatment period, the patients' satisfaction was measured. Intention to treat analysis was used to assess the results.

RESULTS

After 24 weeks of follow-up, results from 60 subjects were fully obtained; however, results of 73 patients included into intention to treat analysis in the sixth-week follow-up. In both groups, VAS, PFT and FFI decreased, while FAAI and PPT increased significantly (P <0.001). At the baseline and at the 24th-week, no significant difference between the two groups was observed in any of the variables. However, a comparison between the baseline and the sixth-week results shows a prominent decrease in PPT and PFT in the CS group compared to the HA group (P = 0.004 and P = 0.011). Finally, there were no statistical differences between the two groups in treatment satisfaction (P = 0.618).

CONCLUSION

Both CS and HA were effective modalities for PF and can improve pain and function with no superiority in 24th-week follow-ups, although CS seems to have a faster trend of improvement in the short term.

Corticosteroid injection plus exercise versus exercise, beyond advice and a heel cup for patients with plantar fasciopathy: protocol for a randomised clinical superiority trial (the FIX-Heel trial)

Background

Plantar fasciopathy has a lifetime prevalence of 10%. Patients experience sharp pain under the heel, often for several months or years. Multiple treatments are available, but no single treatment appears superior to the others. A corticosteroid injection offers short-term pain relief but is no better than placebo in the longer term (> 8 weeks). Heavy-slow resistance training has shown potentially positive effects on long-term outcomes (> 3 months), and combining exercises with an injection may prove to be superior to exercises alone. However, the effect of heavy-slow resistance training compared with a simpler approach of patient advice (e.g., load management) and insoles is currently unknown. This trial compares the efficacy of patient advice with patient advice plus heavy-slow resistance training and with patient advice plus heavy-slow resistance training plus a corticosteroid injection in improving the Foot Health Status Questionnaire pain score after 12 weeks in patients with plantar fasciopathy.

Methods

In this randomised superiority trial, we will recruit 180 patients with ultrasound-confirmed plantar fasciopathy and randomly allocate them to one of three groups: (1) patient advice and an insole (n = 60); (2) patient advice, an insole, and self-dosed heavy-slow resistance training consisting of heel raises (n = 60); or (3) patient advice, an insole, heavy-slow resistance training, and an ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection (n = 60). All participants will be followed for 1 year, with the 12-week follow-up considered the primary endpoint. The primary outcome is the Foot Health Status questionnaire pain domain score. Secondary outcomes include the remaining three domains of the Foot Health Status Questionnaire, a 7-point Global Rating of Change, the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire, physical activity level, health-related quality of life measured by the EQ-5D-5L, and Patient Acceptable Symptom State, which is the point at which participants feel no further need for treatment. Additionally, a health economic evaluation of the treatments will be carried out.

Discussion

This trial will test if adding heavy-slow resistance training to fundamental patient advice and an insole improves outcomes and if a corticosteroid injection adds even further to that effect in patients with plantar fasciopathy.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03804008. Prospectively registered on January 15, 2019.

Pain on the Plantar Surface of the Foot

BACKGROUND

Plantar fasciitis (PF) is characterized by pain on weight-bearing in the medial plantar area of the heel, metatarsalgia (MTG) by pain on the plantar surface of the forefoot radiating into the toes. Reliable figures on lifetime prevalence in Germany are lacking.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved from a selective search in PubMed, on guidelines from Germany and abroad, and on the authors' clinical experience.

RESULTS

Plantar fasciitis is generally diagnosed from the history and physical examination, without any ancillary studies. In 90-95% of cases, conservative treatment (e.g., stretching exercises, fascia training, ultrasound therapy, glucocorticoid injections, radiotherapy, shoe inserts, and shock-wave therapy) brings about total, or at least adequate, relief of pain within one year. Intractable pain is an indication for surgical treatment by plantar fasciotomy and/or calf muscle release. In metatarsalgia, a directed diagnostic work-up to find the cause is mandatory, including a search for excessive mechanical stress due to abnormal foot posture, neuropathic pain, rheumatoid arthritis, aseptic bony necrosis, or malignant disease; imaging studies and pedobarography are needed. For causally oriented treatment, a wide range of conservative and surgical measures can be considered.

CONCLUSION

The reported results of treatments for plantar fasciitis and metatarsalgia are heterogeneous. The efficacy of the individual measures should be studied in randomized controlled trials.

[Differential diagnosis of heel pain]

"Heel pain" describes a very common reason for foot orthopedic consultation and the further differential diagnostic investigation is crucial for the choice of correct treatment. In the treatment of frequent underlying diseases, such as plantar fasciitis or insertional tendinopathy of the Achilles tendon, a variety of modern strategies are available. Rarer diseases, such as tumors or nerve entrapment syndromes must be delineated and correctly classified. This article provides the current state of the diagnostics and treatment of the most common entities of heel pathologies.

Heavy-slow resistance training in addition to an ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection for individuals with plantar fasciopathy: a feasibility study

INTRODUCTION

Plantar fasciopathy, characterised by plantar heel pain, affects one in ten in a lifetime. Heavy-slow resistance training (HSR) is an emerging treatment, but it often takes considerable time before the effect starts to manifest. Combining HSR with a corticosteroid injection (known for its short-term pain relief) could potentially improve outcomes in both short and long term. As this combination is yet to be investigated, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility of combining HSR with a corticosteroid injection for individuals with plantar fasciopathy before investigating the efficacy in a clinical trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We recruited 20 participants with plantar fasciopathy for this prospectively registered feasibility study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03535896). Participants received an ultrasound-guided injection and performed heel raises on a step every second day for 8 weeks. To assess participant acceptability of the combined interventions and exercise compliance, we used a 7-point Likert scale dichotomised to "unacceptable" (categories 1-2) or "acceptable" (categories 3-7) and training diaries. Greater than or equal to 10/20 had to rate the combination "acceptable", ≥ 15/20 had to perform ≥ 20 training sessions, and ≥ 15/20 had to start exercising ≤ 7 days after injection to confirm feasibility.

RESULTS

Eighteen out of 20 rated the combination acceptable. Five training diaries could not be retrieved. Ten out of 15 participants performed ≥ 20 training sessions, and 15/15 started exercising ≤ 7 days after injection.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on participant acceptability and time to exercise start, combining HSR with corticosteroid injection is feasible and the efficacy should be investigated in a future trial. Due to loss of 5/20 training diaries, firm conclusions regarding exercise compliance could not be drawn.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03535896.

Corticosteroid injection for plantar heel pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Corticosteroid injection is frequently used for plantar heel pain (plantar fasciitis), although there is limited high-quality evidence to support this treatment. Therefore, this study reviewed randomised trials to estimate the effectiveness of corticosteroid injection for plantar heel pain.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials that compared corticosteroid injection to any comparator. Primary outcomes were pain and function, categorised as short (0 to 6 weeks), medium (7 to 12 weeks) or longer term (13 to 52 weeks).

Results

A total of 47 trials (2989 participants) were included. For reducing pain in the short term, corticosteroid injection was more effective than autologous blood injection (SMD -0.56; 95% CI, − 0.86 to − 0.26) and foot orthoses (SMD -0.91; 95% CI, − 1.69 to − 0.13). There were no significant findings in the medium term. In the longer term, corticosteroid injection was less effective than dry needling (SMD 1.45; 95% CI, 0.70 to 2.19) and platelet-rich plasma injection (SMD 0.61; 95% CI, 0.16 to 1.06). Notably, corticosteroid injection was found to have similar effectiveness to placebo injection for reducing pain in the short (SMD -0.98; 95% CI, − 2.06, 0.11) and medium terms (SMD -0.86; 95% CI, − 1.90 to 0.19). For improving function, corticosteroid injection was more effective than physical therapy in the short term (SMD -0.69; 95% CI, − 1.31 to − 0.07). When trials considered to have high risk of bias were excluded, there were no significant findings.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of this review, corticosteroid injection is more effective than some comparators for the reduction of pain and the improvement of function in people with plantar heel pain. However, corticosteroid injection is not more effective than placebo injection for reducing pain or improving function. Further trials that are of low risk of bias will strengthen this evidence.

Registration

PROSPERO registration number CRD42016053216.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-019-2749-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Electroacupuncture versus manual acupuncture in the treatment of plantar heel pain syndrome: study protocol for an upcoming randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Plantar heel pain syndrome(PHPS) is a common cause of heel pain. It may worsen a patient's quality of life, and potentially lead to knee, hip or lower back problems. Previous studies have shown that electroacupuncture (EA) and manual acupuncture (MA) are effective treatments for relieving pain in patients with PHPS. However, little evidence supports the use of one intervention over the other.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A total of 92 patients diagnosed with PHPS will be recruited and randomly assigned to an EA group or an MA group at a ratio of 1:1. Patients in both groups will receive a 30 min acupuncture treatment (three times per week) for a total of 12 sessions over 4 weeks. The primary outcome will be the proportion of patients with at least 50% reduction from baseline in the worst pain intensity measured by visual analogue scale (0-100, higher scores signify worse pain) at first steps in the morning after 4-week treatment. The secondary outcomes will include change in worst pain intensity at first steps in the morning, change in mean pain intensity at first steps in the morning, change in worst pain intensity during the day, change in mean pain intensity during the day, change in the pressure pain threshold, change in ankle-dorsiflexion range of motion, change in Foot and Ankle Ability Measure total score and subscale scores, patients' global improvement assessment, patients' expectations for acupuncture and safety evaluation. We will perform all statistical analysis following the intention-to-treat principle.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by our ethics review board (Protocol Approval No. 2018-010-KY). The study findings will be disseminated through presentation at a high-impact medical journal, with online access. We also to plan to present it in select conferences and scientific meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR-1800016531; Pre-results.

Platelet-rich plasma in the foot and ankle

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Platelet-rich plasma has become an increasingly popular treatment option within the orthopedic community to biologically enhance and stimulate difficult-to-heal musculoskeletal tissues. This review evaluates the recent literature on platelet-rich plasma use in the treatment of foot and ankle pathologies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature has demonstrated platelet-rich plasma to have a possible benefit in the treatment of Achilles pathology, chronic plantar fasciitis, osteochondral lesions of the talus, ankle osteoarthritis, and diabetic foot ulcers. However, given the lack of standardization of platelet-rich plasma preparations and protocols and the predominance of low-quality studies, no definitive treatment indications exist. Platelet-rich plasma is a promising treatment option, but at present, there is only limited clinical evidence supporting its use in foot and ankle applications.

Plantar fasciopathy: A current concepts review

Plantar fasciopathy is very prevalent, affecting one in ten people in their lifetime.

Around 90% of cases will resolve within 12 months with conservative treatment.

Gastrocnemius tightness has been associated with dorsiflexion stiffness of the ankle and plantar fascia injury.

The use of eccentric calf stretching with additional stretches for the fascia is possibly the non-operative treatment of choice for chronic plantar fasciopathy.

Medial open release of approximately the medial third of the fascia and release of the first branch of the lateral plantar nerve has been the most accepted surgical treatment for years.

Isolated proximal medial gastrocnemius release has been reported for refractory plantar fasciopathy with excellent results and none of the complications of plantar fasciotomy.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3:485-493. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.170080.

Injected corticosteroids for treating plantar heel pain in adults

BACKGROUND

Plantar heel pain, commonly resulting from plantar fasciitis, often results in significant morbidity. Treatment options include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), orthoses, physical therapy, physical agents (e.g. extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT), laser) and invasive procedures including steroid injections.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of injected corticosteroids for treating plantar heel pain in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, clinical trials registries and conference proceedings. Latest search: 27 March 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised and quasi-randomised trials of corticosteroid injections in the treatment of plantar heel pain in adults were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcome measures. We used a fixed-effect model unless heterogeneity was significant, when a random-effects model was considered. We assessed the overall quality of evidence for individual outcomes using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 39 studies (36 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 3 quasi-RCTs) that involved a total of 2492 adults. Most studies were small (median = 59 participants). Participants' mean ages ranged from 34 years to 59 years. When reported, most participants had heel pain for several months. The trials were usually conducted in outpatient specialty clinics of tertiary care hospitals in 17 countries. Steroid injection was given with a local anaesthetic agent in 34 trials. Follow-up was from one month to over two years. With one exception, trials were assessed at high risk of bias in one or more domains, mostly relating to lack of blinding, including lack of confirmation of allocation concealment. With two exceptions, we rated the available evidence as very low quality, implying in each case that we are 'very uncertain about the estimate'.The 39 trials covered 18 comparisons, with six of the seven trials with three or four groups providing evidence towards two comparisons.Eight trials (724 participants) compared steroid injection versus placebo or no treatment. Steroid injection may lead to lower heel pain visual analogue scores (VAS) (0 to 100; higher scores = worse pain) in the short-term (< 1 month) (MD -6.38, 95% CI -11.13 to -1.64; 350 participants; 5 studies; I² = 65%; low quality evidence). Based on a minimal clinically significant difference (MCID) of 8 for average heel pain, the 95% CI includes a marginal clinical benefit. This potential benefit was diminished when data were restricted to three placebo-controlled trials. Steroid injection made no difference to average heel pain in the medium-term (1 to 6 months follow-up) (MD -3.47, 95% CI -8.43 to 1.48; 382 participants; 6 studies; I² = 40%; low quality evidence). There was very low quality evidence for no effect on function in the medium-term and for an absence of serious adverse events (219 participants, 4 studies). No studies reported on other adverse events, such as post-injection pain, and on return to previous activity. There was very low quality evidence for fewer treatment failures (defined variously as persistent heel pain at 8 weeks, steroid injection at 12 weeks, and unrelieved pain at 6 months) after steroid injection.The available evidence for other comparisons was rated as very low quality. We are therefore very uncertain of the estimates for the relative effects on people with heel pain of steroids compared with other interventions in:1. Tibial nerve block with anaesthetic (2 trials); orthoses (4 trials); oral NSAIDs (2 trials); and intensive physiotherapy (1 trial).2. Physical modalities: ESWT (5 trials); laser (2 trials); and radiation therapy (1 trial).3. Other invasive procedures: locally injectable NSAID (1 trial); platelet-rich plasma injections (5 trials); autologous blood injections (2 trials); botulinum toxin injections (2 trials); cryopreserved human amniotic membrane injection (1 trial); localised peppering with a needle (1 trial); dry needling (1 trial); and mini scalpel needle release (1 trial).We are also uncertain about the estimates from trials testing different techniques of local steroid injection: ultrasonography-guided versus palpation-guided (5 trials); and scintigraphy-guided versus palpation-guided (1 trial).An exploratory analysis involving pooling data from 21 trials reporting on adverse events revealed two ruptures of plantar fascia (reported in 1 trial) and three injection site infections (reported in 2 trials) in 699 participants allocated to steroid injection study arms. Five trials reported a total of 27 participants with less serious short-term adverse events in the 699 participants allocated steroid injection study arms. Reported treatments were analgesia, ice or both. Given the high risk of selective reporting for these outcomes and imprecision, this evidence was rated at very low quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found low quality evidence that local steroid injections compared with placebo or no treatment may slightly reduce heel pain up to one month but not subsequently. The available evidence for other outcomes of this comparison was very low quality. Where available, the evidence from comparisons of steroid injections with other interventions used to treat heel pain and of different methods of guiding the injection was also very low quality. Although serious adverse events relating to steroid injection were rare, these were under-reported and a higher risk cannot be ruled out.Further research should focus on establishing the effects (benefits and harms) of injected steroids compared with placebo in typical clinical settings, subsequent to a course of unsuccessful conservative therapy. Ideally, this should be preceded by research, including patient involvement, aimed to obtain consensus on the priority questions for treating plantar heel pain.