Effectiveness of Total Contact Insoles in Patients with Plantar Fasciitis

Oliveira, Hilda Alcântara Veiga de; Jones, Anamaria; Moreira, Emília; Jennings, Fábio; Natour, Jamil

doi:10.3899/jrheum.140429

Cited by 38 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similar results were found in the study that could not be pooled for short-term function 21. One study reported on midterm function and found no difference between both interventions 19. One study reported on function at long term and found no significant difference15 (online supplementary file 3).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 76%

“…Data on short-term pain were pooled for all three studies, and no significant difference was found ((SMD 0.22 (95%CI −0.05 to 0.50))I 2 0%) between sham and custom-made orthoses (online supplementary file 6). One study reported pain at midterm and no difference was found between both interventions 19. One study reported pain at long term and no difference was found15 (online supplementary file 3).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficacy of foot orthoses for the treatment of plantar heel pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Rasenberg¹,

Riel

Rathleff

et al. 2018

Br J Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPlantar heel pain (PHP) is common. Foot orthoses are often applied as treatment for PHP, even though there is little evidence to support this.ObjectiveTo investigate the effects of different orthoses on pain, function and self-reported recovery in patients with PHP and compare them with other conservative interventions.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesA systematic literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, CINAHL and Google Scholar up to January 2017.Eligibility criteria for selecting studiesRandomised controlled trials comparing foot orthoses with a control (defined as no intervention, sham or other type of conservative treatment) reporting on pain, function or self-reported recovery in patients with PHP.ResultsTwenty studies investigating eight different types of foot orthoses were included in the review. Most studies were of high quality. Pooled data from six studies showed no difference between prefabricated orthoses and sham orthoses for pain at short term (mean difference (MD) of 0.26 (95% CI −0.09 to 0.60)). No difference was found between sham orthoses and custom orthoses for pain at short term (MD 0.22 (95% CI −0.05 to 0.50)), nor was there a difference between prefabricated orthoses and custom orthoses for pain at short term (MD 0.03 (95% CI −0.15 to 0.22)). For the majority of other interventions, no significant differences were found.ConclusionsFoot orthoses are not superior for improving pain and function compared with sham or other conservative treatment in patients with PHP.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42015029659.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 76%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Efficacy of foot orthoses for the treatment of plantar heel pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Rasenberg¹,

Riel

Rathleff

et al. 2018

Br J Sports Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the longer term , this study found very-low-quality evidence to low-quality evidence that foot orthoses are not effective at reducing pain or improving function. Only two trials had data that could be pooled for meta-analysis, and they had different endpoints, with one ending at 6 months25 and the other at 12 months 26…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Foot orthoses for plantar heel pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reason for the different findings between the Rasenberg et al 1 systematic review and our systematic review2 is the outcome measure for pain that was selected from one trial, by Oliveira et al ,3 for the comparison of customised foot orthoses to sham orthoses. In the Rasenberg et al 1 review, the authors chose to extract data from the Foot Health Status Questionnaire pain subscale, whereas for our review,2 we chose to extract the outcome measure from each trial that was the primary outcome (if specified by the authors of each included trial), and therefore we extracted pain with activity measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS).…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

“…In the Rasenberg et al 1 review, the authors chose to extract data from the Foot Health Status Questionnaire pain subscale, whereas for our review,2 we chose to extract the outcome measure from each trial that was the primary outcome (if specified by the authors of each included trial), and therefore we extracted pain with activity measured using the visual analogue scale (VAS). Although Oliveira et al 3 did not prespecify a primary outcome measure, they used the VAS to justify their sample size, and on this basis, we considered VAS to be the primary outcome, which we still believe is appropriate.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%