Self-dosed and pre-determined progressive heavy-slow resistance training have similar effects in people with plantar fasciopathy: a randomised trial

Is radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT), sham-rESWT or a standardised exercise programme in combination with advice plus customised foot orthoses more effective than advice plus customised foot orthoses alone in the treatment of plantar fasciopathy? A double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT), sham-rESWT or a standardised exercise programme in combination with advice plus customised foot orthoses is more effective than advice plus customised foot orthoses alone in alleviating heel pain in patients with plantar fasciopathy.

METHODS

200 patients with plantar fasciopathy were included in a four-arm, parallel-group, sham-controlled, observer-blinded, partly patient-blinded trial. At baseline, before randomisation, all patients received advice plus customised foot orthoses. Patients were randomised to rESWT (n=50), sham-rESWT (n=50), exercise (n=50) or advice plus customised foot orthoses alone (n=50). Patients in the rESWT and sham-rESWT groups received three treatments. The exercise programme comprised two exercises performed three times a week for 12 weeks, including eight supervised sessions with a physiotherapist. Patients allocated to advice plus customised foot orthoses did not receive additional treatment. The primary outcome was change in heel pain during activity in the previous week per Numeric Rating Scale (0-10) from baseline to 6-month follow-up. The outcome was collected at baseline, and 3, 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

The primary analysis showed no statistically significant between-group differences in mean change in heel pain during activity for rESWT versus advice plus customised foot orthoses (-0.02, 95% CI -1.01 to 0.96), sham-rESWT versus advice plus customised foot orthoses (0.52, 95% CI -0.49 to 1.53) and exercise versus advice plus customised foot orthoses (-0.11, 95% CI -1.11 to 0.89) at 6 months.

CONCLUSION

In patients with plantar fasciopathy, there was no additional benefit of rESWT, sham-rESWT or a standardised exercise programme over advice plus customised foot orthoses in alleviating heel pain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03472989.

Prevalence, diagnosis and management of musculoskeletal disorders in elite athletes: A mini-review

Musculoskeletal injuries in elite sports are ones of the most impact issue because their remarkable impact on performance caused by drastic absence of training and competition and a progressive deterioration in physical health, emotional and social athletes' dimensions. Also, the prevalence of epidemiologic research found an incidence of musculoskeletal disorders vary within sports and in elite athletes which is even higher as a consequence of higher demand physical performance. This way, the loss of physical performance due to an sport injury impacts not only the individual economic sphere of the professional but also that ofsports entities, reaching, according to some studies, a loss estimated in the range of 74.7 million pounds. Thus, the purpose of this article is to review and to provide an overview of the most common musculoskeletal injuries in elite sports precipitating factors, clinical presentation, evidence-based diagnostic evaluation, and treatment recommendations with a view to preventing medical conditions or musculoskeletal injuries that may alter performance and general health in the elite athletes.

Heel Pain - Plantar Fasciitis: Revision 2023

The Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA) has an ongoing effort to create evidence-based practice guidelines for orthopaedic physical therapy management of patients with musculoskeletal impairments described in the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). The purpose of these revised clinical practice guidelines is to review recent peer-reviewed literature and make recommendations related to nonarthritic heel pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(12):CPG1-CPG39. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.0303.

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.

Physiotherapeutic Interventions for Individuals Suffering From Plantar Fasciitis: A Systematic Review

The foot and the lower leg comprise the ankle joint complex. The foot is crucial for the maintenance of posture. Frequently, overuse or repeated microtrauma to the fascia causes plantar fasciitis. This review aims to suggest the efficacy of various plantar fasciitis (PF) interventions based on modifications in clinical results. This review included studies from 2019 to March 2023 identified through a systematic literature search. The measures used to predict improvement in pain, discomfort, and foot function symptoms included the Visual Analog scale, Numerical Pain Rating Scale, Pressure Point Threshold by algometer, Weight-Bearing Lunge Test by inch tape, and range of motion. The review included 20 studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Therapeutic interventions included insoles, foot orthosis, foam roller stretching, manual stretching, muscle strengthening, intrinsic muscle activities, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, dry needling, laser, ultrasound, and others, which resulted in pain reduction, improved foot function, and ease of everyday routine. All therapeutic strategies used impacts resulting from minimal to maximal recovery. Various advanced approaches are more effective than conventional physical therapy. In conclusion, conservative therapeutic strategies with manual techniques, orthoses, and alternative intervention strategies can be combined to effectively relieve pain and improve function and overall results. Further high-quality studies are essential to learn more about the ideal dose, treatment approaches, and long-term impacts of these therapies.

Surgical or non-surgical treatment of plantar fasciopathy (SOFT): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Plantar fasciopathy is the most common reason for complaints of plantar heel pain and one of the most prevalent musculoskeletal conditions with a reported lifetime incidence of 10%. The condition is normally considered self-limiting with persistent symptoms that often last for several months or years. Multiple treatments are available, but no single treatment appears superior to the others. Heavy-slow resistance training and radiofrequency microtenotomy for the treatment of plantar fasciopathy have shown potentially positive effects on short- and long-term outcomes (> 3 months). However, the effect of heavy-slow resistance training compared with a radiofrequency microtenotomy treatment is currently unknown. This trial compares the efficacy of heavy-slow resistance training and radiofrequency microtenotomy treatment with supplemental standardized patient education and heel inserts in improving the Foot Health Status Questionnaire pain score after 6 months in patients with plantar fasciopathy.

Methods

In this randomized superiority trial, we will recruit 70 patients with ultrasound-confirmed plantar fasciopathy and randomly allocate them to one of two groups: (1) heavy-slow resistance training, patient education and a heel insert (n = 35), and (2) radiofrequency microtenotomy treatment, patient education and a heel insert (n = 35). All participants will be followed for 1 year, with the 6-month 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 Global Perceived Effect scale, the physical activity level, and Patient Acceptable Symptom State, which is the point at which participants feel no further need for treatment.

Discussion

By comparing the two treatment options, we should be able to answer if radiofrequency microtenotomy compared with heavy-slow resistance training is superior in patients with plantar fasciopathy.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03854682. Prospectively registered on February 26, 2019.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13063-022-06785-w.

ICON 2020-International Scientific Tendinopathy Symposium Consensus: A Scoping Review of Psychological and Psychosocial Constructs and Outcome Measures Reported in Tendinopathy Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVE

To identify and describe the psychological and psychosocial constructs and outcome measures used in tendinopathy research.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

LITERATURE SEARCH

We searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, PEDro, CINAHL, and APA PsychNet databases on July 10, 2021, for all published studies of tendinopathy populations measuring psychological and psychosocial factors.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies using a clinical diagnosis of tendinopathy or synonyms (eg, jumper's knee or subacromial impingement) with or without imaging confirmation.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We described the volume, nature, distribution, and characteristics of psychological and psychosocial outcomes reported in the tendinopathy field.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine constructs were identified, including 16 psychological and 13 psychosocial constructs. The most frequently-reported constructs were work-related outcomes (32%), quality of life (31%), depression (30%), anxiety (18%), and fear (14%). Outcome measures consisted of validated and nonvalidated questionnaires and 1-item custom questions (including demographics). The number of different outcome measures used to assess an individual construct ranged between 1 (emotional distress) and 11 (quality of life) per construct.

CONCLUSION

There was a large variability in constructs and outcome measures reported in tendinopathy research, which limits conclusions about the relationship between psychological and psychosocial constructs, outcome measures, and tendinopathies. Given the wide range of psychological and psychosocial constructs reported, there is an urgent need to develop a core outcome set in tendinopathy. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2022;52(6):375-388. doi:10.2519/jospt.2022.11005.

Assessment of the reporting quality of resistance training interventions in randomised controlled trials for lower limb tendinopathy: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

1. To describe what exercises and intervention variables are used in resistance training interventions in randomised controlled trials for lower limb tendinopathy 2. To assess completeness of reporting as assessed by the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) and the Toigo and Boutellier framework. 3. To assess the implementation of scientific resistance training principles. 4. To assess therapeutic quality of exercise interventions with the i-CONTENT tool.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, EMBase, SPORTDiscus, and the Cochrane library databases.

REVIEW METHODS

Systematic review of randomised controlled trials that reported using resistance exercises for lower limb tendinopathies.

RESULTS

We included 109 RCTs. Eccentric heel drops were the most common exercise (43 studies), followed by isotonic heel raises (21), and single leg eccentric decline squats (18). Reporting of exercise descriptor items from the Toigo and Boutellier framework ranged from 0-13, with an average score of 9/13, and only 7 studies achieved a full 13/13. Reporting of items from the CERT ranged from 0-18, with an average score of 14/19. No study achieved a full 19/19, however 5 achieved 18/19. Scoring for resistance training principles ranged from 1-10, with only 11 studies achieving 10/10. Reporting across studies for the i-CONTENT tool ranged from 2-7, with an average score of 5 across included studies. A total of 19 studies achieved a full 7/7 score. Less than 50% of studies achieved an overall low risk of bias, highlighting the methodological concerns throughout studies.

CONCLUSION

The reporting of exercise descriptors and intervention content was generally high across RCTs for lower limb tendinopathy, with most allowing exercise replication. However, reporting for some tendinopathies and content items such as adherence was poor, limiting optimal translation to clinical practice.

Resistance Training Interventions for Lower Limb Tendinopathies: A Scoping Review of Resistance Training Reporting Content, Quality, and Scientific Implementation

The objectives of this scoping review were as follows: (1) to describe what exercises and intervention variables are used in resistance training interventions for lower limb tendinopathy,  (2) to assess the completeness of reporting as assessed by the Consensus on Exercise Reporting Template (CERT) and the Toigo and Boutellier framework, and (3) to assess the implementation of scientific resistance training principles. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, AMED, Embase, SPORTDiscus, and Cochrane Library databases. Randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case series, case reports, and observational studies that reported using resistance exercises for lower limb tendinopathies were considered for inclusion, with 194 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Completeness of the reporting of exercise descriptors and programme variables was assessed by the CERT and the Toigo and Boutellier framework. Reporting of exercise descriptor items from the Toigo and Boutellier framework ranged from 0 to 13, with an average score of 9/13, with only 9 studies achieving a full 13/13. Reporting of items from the CERT ranged from 0 to 18, with an average score of 13/19. No study achieved a full 19/19; however, 8 achieved 18/19. Scoring for resistance training principles ranged from 1 to 10, with only 14 studies achieving 10/10. Eccentric heel-drops were the most common exercise (75 studies), followed by isotonic heel raises (38), and single-leg eccentric decline squats (27). The reporting of exercise descriptors and intervention content was high across studies, with most allowing exercise replication, particularly for Achilles and patellar tendinopathy. However, reporting for some tendinopathies and content items such as adherence was poor, limiting optimal translation to clinical practice.

Putting "Heavy" into Heavy Slow Resistance

The body of literature on tendinopathy management has come a long way in the last few decades and a variety of changes in the clinical approach have emerged from this research. One particular approach that shows promise has been called "heavy slow resistance" (HSR), and this has been the subject of investigation in a number of randomized controlled trials. While the premise for this approach is defensible, a critical examination of the implementation of these HSR protocols results in some concerns when compared to basic exercise science principles. This article lays out some considerations that will help future investigators to improve their exercise prescription approaches in this area.

The Unknown Prevalence of Postrandomization Bias in 15 Physical Therapy Journals: A Methods Review

OBJECTIVES

To determine the prevalence of prospective clinical trial registration and postrandomization bias in published musculoskeletal physical therapy randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

DESIGN

A methods review.

LITERATURE SEARCH

Articles indexed in MEDLINE and published between January 2016 and July 2020 were included.

STUDY SELECTION CRITERIA

Two independent blinded reviewers identified the RCTs using Covidence. We included RCTs related to musculoskeletal interventions that were published in International Society of Physiotherapy Journal Editors member journals.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Data were extracted independently for the variables of interest from the identified RCTs by 2 blinded reviewers. The data were presented descriptively or in frequency tables.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-eight RCTs were identified. One third of RCTs were consistent with their prospectively registered intent (49/138); consistency with prospectively registered intent could not be determined for two thirds (89/138) of the RCTs. Four RCTs (8%)reported inconsistent results with the primary aims and 7 (14%) with the outcomes from the prospective clinical trial registry, despite high methodological quality (Physiotherapy Evidence Database [PEDro] scale score). Differences between prospectively registered and non-prospectively registered RCTs for PEDro scale scores had a medium effect size (r = 0.30). Two of 15 journals followed their clinical trial registration policy 100% of the time; in 1 journal, the published RCTs were consistent with the clinical trial registration.

CONCLUSION

Postrandomization bias in musculoskeletal physical therapy RCTs could not be ruled out, due to the lack of prospective clinical trial registration and detailed data analysis plans. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2021;51(11):542-550. Epub 21 Sep 2021. doi:10.2519/jospt.2021.10491.

Autoregulation in Resistance Training for Lower Limb Tendinopathy: A Potential Method for Addressing Individual Factors, Intervention Issues, and Inadequate Outcomes

Musculoskeletal disorders, such as tendinopathy, are placing an increasing burden on society and health systems. Tendinopathy accounts for up to 30% of musculoskeletal disorders, with a high incidence in athletes and the general population. Although resistance training has shown short-term effectiveness in the treatment of lower limb tendinopathy, more comprehensive exercise protocols and progression methods are required due to poor long-term outcomes. The most common resistance training protocols are predetermined and standardized, which presents significant limitations. Current standardized protocols do not adhere to scientific resistance training principles, consider individual factors, or take the importance of individualized training into account. Resistance training programs in case of tendinopathy are currently not achieving the required intensity and dosage, leading to high recurrence rates. Therefore, better methods for individualizing and progressing resistance training are required to improve outcomes. One potential method is autoregulation, which allows individuals to progress training at their own rate, taking individual factors into account. Despite the finding of their effectiveness in increasing the strength of healthy athletes, autoregulation methods have not been investigated in case of tendinopathy. The purpose of this narrative review was 3-fold: firstly, to give an overview and a critical analysis of the individual factors involved in tendinopathy and current resistance training protocols and their limitations. Secondly, to give an overview of the history, methods, and application of autoregulation strategies both in sports performance and physiotherapy. Finally, a theoretical adaptation of a current tendinopathy resistance training protocol using autoregulation methods is presented, providing an example of how the method could be implemented in clinical practice or future research.

The implementation of resistance training principles in exercise interventions for lower limb tendinopathy: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The primary purpose of this systematic review is to examine the literature on resistance training interventions for lower limb tendinopathy to evaluate the proportion of interventions that implemented key resistance training principles (specificity, progression, overload, individualisation) and reported relevant prescription components (frequency, intensity, sets, repetitions) and reported intervention adherence.

METHODS

Two reviewers performed a systematic review after screening titles and abstracts based on eligibility criteria. Identified papers were obtained in full text, with data extracted regarding the implementation of resistance training principles. Included articles were evaluated by the Cochrane risk of bias tool, with a scoring tool out of 10 used for implementation and reporting of the 5 key principles. Scientific databases were searched in November 2020 and included Medline, CINAHL, AMED, and Sportsdiscus.

RESULTS

52 randomised controlled trials investigating resistance training in five different lower limb tendinopathies were included. Although most studies considered the principles of progression (92%) and individualisation (88%), only 19 studies (37%) appropriately described how this progression in resistance was achieved, and only 18 studies (35%) reported specific instruction on how individualisation was applied. Adherence was considered in 27 studies (52%), with only 17 studies (33%) reporting the levels of adherence. In the scoring criteria, only 5 studies (10%) achieved a total maximum score of 10, with 17 studies (33%) achieving a maximum score of 8 for implementing and reporting the principles of specificity, overload, progression and individualisation.

CONCLUSION

There is meaningful variability and methodological concerns regarding the application and reporting of resistance training principles, particularly progression and individualisation, along with intervention adherence throughout studies. Collectively, these findings have important implications for the prescription of current resistance training interventions, including the design and implementation of future interventions for populations with lower limb tendinopathies.

Autoregulated and individualised resistance training versus predetermined and standardised resistance training in tendinopathy: A systematic review protocol

REVIEW OBJECTIVE

To synthesise the best available evidence on the effectiveness of interventions that have used autoregulated and individualised resistance training versus predetermined and standardised resistance training in treating any tendinopathy.

INTRODUCTION

Recent evidence suggests that individualised exercise may be more effective than standardised exercise for musculoskeletal disorders such as tendinopathy. However, no systematic reviews have been conducted on the topic and optimal treatment protocols and clinical recommendations are lacking.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of autoregulated and individualised resistance training versus predetermined and standardised resistance training for tendinopathy in adults will be included.

METHODS

The authors will search for a wide range of sources to find both published and unpublished studies via EBSCOhost, including, but not limited to, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database. Studies published in a language other than English will only be considered if a translation is available. The Joanna Briggs Institute systematic review methodology will be followed when conducting the review. Data synthesis will be conducted using meta-analysis or narrative synthesis, where appropriate.

Autoregulated heavy slow resistance training combined with radial shockwave therapy for plantar heel pain: Protocol for a mixed-methods pilot randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Plantar heel pain (PHP) is considered a tendinopathy and it affects up to 10% of the population. Both heavy slow resistance training (HSRT) and extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) have shown effectiveness for treating PHP in isolation. However, more comprehensive exercise protocols and progression methods are needed due to poor long-term outcomes, and better standardisation of ESWT protocols are required. Autoregulation of resistance training involves self-selecting exercise dosage based on individual factors. Although autoregulation has proven effective for strength gains in athletes, it has not been investigated in tendinopathy. Recent studies recommend that PHP should not be treated by one treatment intervention in isolation. However, there is a dearth of research investigating the feasibility and effectiveness of combined treatment interventions for PHP. Currently, no studies have investigated autoregulated HSRT combined with ESWT, despite their individual efficacy. The optimal treatment protocol for PHP is unknown, and there is a need to ascertain whether the addition of ESWT to autoregulated HSRT leads to better outcomes compared to either alone.

METHODS

A three-arm randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing these groups would be the ideal way to investigate this question, with a pilot RCT testing trial procedures and process evaluation required prior to a definitive RCT. Patients expectations, feasibility and acceptability of combined ESWT and exercise for PHP also remain unknown. Therefore, the addition of qualitative interviews in a mixed-methods pilot RCT would help ascertain acceptability and help explain the intervention outcomes.

Altered Central Pain Processing in Patients With Chronic Plantar Heel Pain: A Critically Appraised Topic

Clinical Scenario: Plantar heel pain is a common condition frequently associated with persistent symptoms and functional limitations affecting both the athletic and nonathletic populations. Common interventions target impairments at the foot and ankle and local drivers of symptoms. If symptoms are predominantly perpetuated by alterations in central pain processing, addressing peripheral impairments alone may not be sufficient. Clinical Question: Do individuals with chronic plantar heel pain demonstrate signs potentially associated with altered central pain processing? Summary of Key Findings: After searching 6 electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, SportDiscus, Cochrane, and PEDro) and filtering titles based on predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria, 4 case-control studies were included. All studies scored highly on the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for quality assessment. Using pressure pain thresholds, each study found decreased pressure pain hypersensitivity locally and at a remote site compared to control groups, suggesting the presence, to some extent, of altered nociceptive pain processing. Clinical Bottom Line: In the studies reviewed, reported results suggest a possible presence of centrally mediated symptoms in persons with plantar heel pain. However, despite findings from these studies, limitations in appropriate matching based on body mass index and measures used suggest additional investigation is warranted. Strength of Recommendation: According to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, there is evidence level C to suggest chronic plantar heel pain is associated with alterations in central pain processing.

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).

Load progression criteria in exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to summarise and analyse the current literature about what progression criteria are applied in loading exercise programmes in lower limb tendinopathies and their evidence and effectiveness.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Scopus and PEDro were searched from inception to 24 September 2020. The inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trials that included patients with midportion Achilles, patellar or gluteal tendinopathy; assessed function, pain or performance; included at least one group where progressive physical exercise was administered as monotherapy; included at least a control group. We excluded studies that included subjects with previous tendon surgical treatment; studies with control group that conducted a supplemented modality of the exercise performed in the intervention group. A narrative synthesis was conducted. Cohen's d and the percentage of change of main clinical and performance outcomes were obtained. Methodological quality was assessed using the PEDro scale.

RESULTS

Thirty studies that described progression criteria were included. Six types of criteria grouped in two categories were identified and included in a new classification proposal: pain as a primary criterion (evoking and avoid-pain based), and pain and symptom control as a secondary criterion (conditioning stages, fatigue-based, subjective perception and temporary linear increase). Most of the studies applied a pain-based criterion. Criteria based on conditioning stages were also commonly applied. Other criteria such as fatigue, a temporary linear increase, or the subjective perception of the patient's abilities were occasionally applied.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a predominant use of pain-based criteria, but the utilisation of these criteria is not supported by strong evidence. This review evidences the need for studies that compare the same exercise programme using different progression criteria. A new classification of the existing progression criteria is proposed based on the use of pain as the primary or secondary criterion.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018110997.

Effectiveness of combined shockwave therapy and plantar fascia stretching interventions in treating plantar heel pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to synthesize the best available evidence on the effectiveness of interventions that have used a combination of extracorporeal shockwave therapy and plantar fascia-specific stretching to treat plantar heel pain compared to any other non-surgical intervention.

INTRODUCTION

Recent evidence suggests combining shockwave therapy and plantar fascia stretching may be more effective than other treatments for plantar heel pain. However, no systematic reviews have been conducted on the topic and optimal treatment protocols and clinical recommendations are lacking.

INCLUSION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of combined shockwave therapy and plantar stretching for plantar heel pain in adults will be included.

METHODS

The authors will search a wide range of sources to identify both published and unpublished studies via EBSCOhost, including, but not limited to MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED). Studies published in a language other than English will only be considered if a translation is available. The JBI systematic review methodology will be followed when conducting the review. Data synthesis will be conducted using meta-analysis or narrative synthesis, where appropriate.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42020171538.

The effectiveness of radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy (rESWT), sham-rESWT, standardised exercise programme or usual care for patients with plantar fasciopathy: study protocol for a double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial

Background

Plantar fasciopathy is a common cause of plantar heel pain, with a reported prevalence of up to 10%. The choice of best practice in these patients is debated. Two randomised studies reported that radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy is effective, but a meta-analysis concluded that due to methodological limitations, the evidence is questionable. There are few studies reporting the effect of exercise programs with high-load strength training, despite widespread use. The objective of this placebo-controlled, observer-blinded and partly patient blinded trial is to compare rESWT, sham-rESWT, standardised exercise programme and usual care for alleviating heel pain at 6 and 12 months follow-up.

Methods/design

A double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial is conducted at a hospital outpatient clinic of physical medicine and rehabilitation. Patients with chronic (> 3 months) pain due to plantar fasciopathy, aged 18 to 70 years old, are eligible for inclusion in the trial. Patients will be randomly allocated in 1:1 ratio to receive rESWT, sham-rESWT, standardised exercises or usual care. The sample size is estimated to 200 patients, 50 in each group. rESWT or sham-rESWT will be given once a week for 3 weeks. A physiotherapist will supervise the exercises, with a total of 8 sessions over 12 weeks. The patients in the usual care group will receive information, advice and foot orthosis only. All patients, regardless of group, will receive the same information and get an individual customised foot orthosis made by an orthopaedic technician. The primary outcome measure is heel pain intensity during activity in the last week, using a numeric rating scale (NRS, 0 to 10) at the 6 months follow-up adjusted for baseline pain intensity. The secondary outcomes are at the 6- and 12-month follow-up and include Foot Functional Index Revised Short Version (FFI-RS), Patient Global Impression of Change Scale (7-point Likert scale), RAND-12 Health Status Inventory (RAND-12), NRS during rest and NRS during activity (12 months). The patients receiving rESWT/sham-rESWT and the outcome assessor will be blinded to the group assignment.

Discussion

This trial is designed in order to provide results important for future clinical practice.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03472989. Registered on 14 March 2018

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.

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.