Skip to content

A comparison of shock wave treatment versus steroid injection in the treatment of heel pain

Low dose Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy versus Intralesional Corticosteroid Injection in the treatment of Plantar Fasciitis: A comparative study

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
CTRI
Registry ID
CTRI/2017/12/010975
Enrollment
600
Registered
2017-12-26
Start date
Unknown
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2021-11-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Health Condition 1: null- Plantar Fasciitis

Interventions

Intervention1: Extra corporeal shock wave therapy: Patients will be treated sitting in a chair with their affected foot supported by a foot rest. The sore area near or over the heel will be identifie

Sponsors

Armed Forces Medical College
Lead Sponsor

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: 1) Patients of more than 18 years of age with plantar heel pain, worse on rising in the morning and/or after periods of sitting or lying, and present for at least 6 weeks. 2) On examination, the site of maximal tenderness is at the calcaneal attachment of the plantar fascia. 3) Pain aggravated by hopping on the foot and relieved with tie-beam taping 4) Patients satisfying the above criteria and who have already received unsuccessful conservative therapy in the form of passive stretching exercises, NSAIDS, rest, local heat or cold.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: 1)Previous surgery, CSI, or ESWT for heel pain. 2)Clinical features suggestive of seronegative spondyloarthropathy. 3)Clinical features suggestive of complex regional pain syndrome. 4)Local arthritis, Rheumatoid arthritis, DM, local or systemic infection, PVD, metabolic disease such as gout, clotting disorder, anticoagulant therapy, or the presence of a cardiac pacemaker. 5)Age less than 18 years. 6)Pregnancy 7)Nerve-related symptoms (Baxter nerve entrapment, radiculopathy, tarsal tunnel syndrome). 8)Localized dysfunction of the knee, ankle, or foot. 9)Work-related or compensable injury.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
All patients were assessed before treatment, 3 months after treatment, and 12 months after treatment. On each occasion, they were asked to rate the pain that they experience on rising in the morning or after periods of sitting (whichever was worse). Their pain was rated on a visual analogue scale (VAS), with 0 indicating no pain and 10 the worst imaginable pain. Timepoint: All patients were assessed before treatment, 3 months after treatment, and 12 months after treatment. On each occasion, they were asked to rate the pain that they experience on rising in the morning or after periods of sitting (whichever was worse). Their pain was rated on a visual analogue scale (VAS), with 0 indicating no pain and 10 the worst imaginable pain.

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
All patients were assessed before treatment, 3 months following treatment, and 12 months following treatment for USG estimation of plantar fascia thickness, and a relationship between the different therapeutic interventions and their effects on plantar fascia thickness, if any, were evaluated.Timepoint: At 3 months and at 12 months

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactDr Mohammed Schezan Iqbal

Armed Forces Medical College, Pune

dr.grjoe@gmail.com08007810911

Outcome results

None listed

Source: CTRI (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026