News

CALL FOR PAPERS NOVEMBER 2024

IJSAR going to launch new issue Volume 05, Issue 11, November 2024; Open Access; Peer Reviewed Journal; Fast Publication. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions or comments send email to: editor@scienceijsar.com

IMPACT FACTOR: 6.673

Submission last date: 15th November 2024

Comparison of efficacy of shock-wave therapy versus injection therapy (Corticosteroids & platelet-rich plasma) in treatment of plantar fasciitis

×

Error message

  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6609 of /home1/sciensrd/public_html/scienceijsar.com/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6609 of /home1/sciensrd/public_html/scienceijsar.com/includes/common.inc).
  • Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /home1/sciensrd/public_html/scienceijsar.com/includes/common.inc).
Author: 
Abir Aly Abbassy, Amal Aljaziri and Nermine Farouk Mikhail
Page No: 
8489-8493

Background: The argument on whether extracorporeal shock-wave therapy (ESWT) and exert an equivalent pain control or which is the better treatment for plantar fasciitis (PF) in adults remains to be resolved. It is important and necessary to conduct a meta-analysis to make a relatively more credible and overall assessment about which treatment method performs better pain control in treatment of PF in adults. Methods: The Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library electronic databases were searched for all relevant studies. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) focusing on comparing ESWT and CSI therapies in PF cases in adults were included. The primary outcome measure was visual analog scale (VAS) reduction, whereas the secondary outcomes included treatment success rate, recurrence rate, function scores, and adverse events. Results: In the present study, our analysis showed that high-intensity ESWT had superior pain relief and success rates relative to the CSI group within 3 months, but the ESWT with low intensity was slightly inferior to CSI for efficacy within 3 months. In addition, patients with CSI may tend to increase the need for the analgesic and more adverse events may be associated with the ESWT. However, the ESWT and CSI present similar recurrent rate and functional outcomes. Conclusion: Our analysis showed that the pain relief and success rates were related to energy intensity levels, with the high-intensity ESWT had the highest probability of being the best treatment within 3 months, followed by CSI, and low-intensity ESWT. More high-quality RCTs with long-term follow-up time are needed to further compare the differences of CSI and ESWT for adults with PF.

Download PDF: