INTRODUCTION: Relevant data of randomized-controlled studies on shock wave treatment for chronic plantar fasciopathy are statistically and clinically heterogeneous. METHODS: Randomized trials were identified form a current search of the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group specialized register of trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and reference lists of articles and dissertations. We identified and retrieved a total of 17 articles. Methodological quality criterial included appropriate randomization, allocation concealment, blinding, number lost of follow-up and intention to treat analysis. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded pooled analyses. Instead, individual trial results were described in the text. RESULTS: We identified conflicting results in the 17 studies, involving more than 2100 participants. There was considerable heterogeneity in terms of methodological quality, treatment regimen, patient selection and follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: With current studies heterogenous in terms of the duration of the disorder; type, frequency and total dose of shock wave therapy (SWT); period of time between SWT; type of management and control group; timing of follow-up and outcomes assessed, a pooled meta-analysis of SWT for chronic plantar fasciopathy was considered inappropriate. Neverhteless, there was a preponderance of well-designed studies showing favourable results. It appears that one should only consider SWT for plantar fasciopathy after more common, accepted and proven non-invasive treatments have failed.

Shock wave therapy for chronic plantar fasciopathy / Rompe, Jd; Furia, J; Weil, L; Maffulli, Nicola. - In: BRITISH MEDICAL BULLETIN. - ISSN 0007-1420. - (2007), pp. 183-208.

Shock wave therapy for chronic plantar fasciopathy

MAFFULLI, Nicola
2007

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Relevant data of randomized-controlled studies on shock wave treatment for chronic plantar fasciopathy are statistically and clinically heterogeneous. METHODS: Randomized trials were identified form a current search of the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group specialized register of trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE and reference lists of articles and dissertations. We identified and retrieved a total of 17 articles. Methodological quality criterial included appropriate randomization, allocation concealment, blinding, number lost of follow-up and intention to treat analysis. Significant heterogeneity between studies precluded pooled analyses. Instead, individual trial results were described in the text. RESULTS: We identified conflicting results in the 17 studies, involving more than 2100 participants. There was considerable heterogeneity in terms of methodological quality, treatment regimen, patient selection and follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: With current studies heterogenous in terms of the duration of the disorder; type, frequency and total dose of shock wave therapy (SWT); period of time between SWT; type of management and control group; timing of follow-up and outcomes assessed, a pooled meta-analysis of SWT for chronic plantar fasciopathy was considered inappropriate. Neverhteless, there was a preponderance of well-designed studies showing favourable results. It appears that one should only consider SWT for plantar fasciopathy after more common, accepted and proven non-invasive treatments have failed.
2007
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Shock wave therapy for chronic plantar fasciopathy / Rompe, Jd; Furia, J; Weil, L; Maffulli, Nicola. - In: BRITISH MEDICAL BULLETIN. - ISSN 0007-1420. - (2007), pp. 183-208.
File allegati a questo prodotto
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1695011
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 131
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 121
social impact