Abstract
Introduction
Plantar fasciitis (PFS) is described by an intense pain over medial tubercle of calcaneus, increased with the first step after waking up, after rest and during weightbearing activity. It is the most common cause of plantar heel pain in adults with the prevalence estimated 10% of the general population. Ultrasound imaging is commonly being used to measure the PF thickness, evaluate the efficacy of different treatments and a guide therapeutic technique in patients with PFS. The objective of this study was to systematically review the studies that were previously published to evaluate the role of ultrasound in the assessment of PF in patients with PFS.
Methods
A systematic search was carried out over the last 5 years from 2017 to 2022 on basis the following electronic databases: Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science, Springer and PubMed. The keywords that used in the searching were: ultrasound, sonography, ultrasonography, plantar fasciitis, imaging of plantar fascia, physiotherapy of plantar fasciitis, interventional treatment of plantar fasciitis, randomized controlled trial of plantar fasciitis and interventional ultrasound. The review focused on the assessment of PF in patients with PFS underwent different interventions using B-mode, shear wave elastography (SWE) and color Doppler ultrasound.
Results
During the search process, 1661 were recorded using the proper keywords from 2017 to 2022 in which 666 original articles were found after removing the review and duplicated articles. Of these, thirty articles met the inclusion criteria and included in this review. The articles have assessed the PF in patients with PFS under different conditions using different ultrasound modes. Twenty-six articles evaluated the effectiveness of different treatment on PF in patients with PFS using different ultrasound modes. In 8 of 26 articles, the ultrasound was used as both an assessment tool of PF and guide therapeutic technique in patients with PFS. In 18 articles, the ultrasound was used as only assessment tool to identify the PF thickness and its observation changes in patients with PFS. Four articles compared the PF thickness and its intrafascial changes between patients with PFS and healthy subjects.
Conclusion
The ultrasound can be a reliable tool in assessment the effect of different interventions on PF by evaluating its thickness, echogenicity and stiffness changes in patients with PFS. There were different methods and treatments were used among the studies.
Graphical abstract
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Plantar fascia (PF) is the fibrous layer of connective tissue across the plantar surface of foot that has been an important role in ankle and foot biomechanics [1]. It consists of 3 main bands which are lateral, central and medial. The lateral band extends beneath the plantar surface of the abductor digiti quinti muscle and passes laterally with the posterior fascia and distally with the 5th metatarsophalangeal joint capsule. The central band is thickest and strongest one of the fascia, arising from the medial calcaneal tubercle and extending anteriorly to cover the plantar surface of the flexor digitorum brevis muscle. The medial band is the thinnest section, situated under the plantar surface of the abductor hallucis muscle, passing distally to the 1st metatarsophalangeal joint capsule and proximally to the flexor retinaculum of the foot [2, 3]. PF provides a static and dynamic support of the longitudinal arch foot, being as a dynamic shock absorber [4, 5].
Plantar fasciitis is commonly used to describe a plantar heel pain with inflammation of the PF at its origin, not to pain arising along the course of the fascia. In contrary, a substantial evidence of plantar fasciosis is associated with degenerative changes without inflammation [6]. Ledderhose disease, also known plantar fibromatosis, is a benign condition characterized by proliferation of fibrous tissue in form of nodules or cords in the PF, occasionally located on the medial and central bands of the fascia [7].
Nevertheless, there is a controversy regarding the appropriate term of plantar fasciitis, whether the disease should be referred to as “plantar fasciitis”, “plantar fasciosis” or “plantar heel pain”. Although the nature of plantar fasciitis can be either inflammatory or degenerative, imaging and histological findings confirm the hypothesis that “plantar fasciitis” is actually a degenerative disorder rather than inflammatory [4, 8]. Several studies; therefore, have used “plantar heel pain” as a general term [9,10,11,12]. In contrast, the recent trials and reviews [13] have regained to the most common clinical phrase of “plantar fasciitis”. Thus, we will use the term “plantar fasciitis (PFS)” in this review.
PFS is the most common cause of plantar heel pain in adults with the prevalence estimated 10% of the general population [14, 15]. Despite the pathogenesis of PFS is still ambiguous, the intrinsic muscle weakness, prolong standing, longtime walking and running, decreased elasticity of the plantar fascia, increased body mass index, reduced strength of gastrosoleus muscles, reduced dorsiflexion of ankle, leg length discrepancy and longitudinal arch deformity such as pes planus may increase the risk of PFS [16,17,18].
PFS is characterized by intense pain over the medial plantar aspect of the heel, sharpened with first step in the morning or after rest and increased during weightbearing activity [19,20,21,22,23,24].
The Cochrane review showed that an efficacy for any type of PFS treatments is not studied well [25]. Furthermore, treatment modalities and options for PFS remain inconsistent as well as the recommended methods of intervention are very limited [11, 13, 18, 26, 27]. There is a little evidence for using conservative treatment such as custom orthoses or prefabricated for long-term improvements in heel pain or disability [13, 28, 29] in spite of a recent trial revealed that short-term improvements in heel pain using full-length silicone insoles is considered as an initial line for PFS treatment [30]. In the light of that, a recent systematic review concluded that manual physiotherapy such as PF stretching and joint mobilization could reduce pain and stiffness, improve function and impairments. However, the optimum dosage of manual physiotherapy is still controversial [31]. In the same context, stretching of intrinsic foot muscle has been shown to be effective for improving heel pain and disability of PFS [32, 33].
As ultrasound is available, low-cost and comfortable for patients, it is superior to MRI in imaging the PF and diagnosis the PFS in many studies and as a guide therapeutic tool in patients with PFS [14]. This study was conducted to systematically review the previous studies using ultrasound as assessment tool in patient with PFS underwent different interventions.
Methodology
A searching was included the original articles published over the last 5 years from 2017 to 2022. The following electronic databases were depended: Science Direct, Scopus, Web of Science, Springer and PubMed. This systematic review was conducted according to the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) [34].
Search strategy
The following keywords: “ultrasound”, “sonography”, “ultrasonography”, “plantar fasciitis”, “imaging of plantar fascia”, “physiotherapy of plantar fasciitis”, “interventional treatment of plantar fasciitis”, “randomized controlled trial of plantar fasciitis” and “interventional ultrasound” were used in the searching.
Inclusion criteria
The papers that have met the following criteria: (1) patients aged over 18 years. (2) patients with PFS, controlled (positive control) or healthy (negative control) groups for comparison. (3) randomized control trial or case–control design. (4) treatment of PFS with ultrasound assessment. (5) ultrasound was used in evaluation PF and surrounding tissues in patients with PFS. (6) the papers were written in English language. (7) original researches.
Data extraction
The articles were first checked based on titles and abstracts. If the title and abstracts were unclear, the full-length article was screened. The articles were chosen according to Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP, CASP UK, Oxford, UK) checklist. CASP results were summarized in Table 1. Two reviewers separately extracted the data from the final selected articles. If there was no agreement, the final decision was sought from the third reviewer.
Data collection process
During the search process, 4569 articles were found using proper keywords in which 1661 articles were found over the last five years. Of these, 666 articles were identified after removing the review and duplicated articles. Thirty- three of the 666 articles were relevant of this review. Two articles out of 33 articles are required subscribing to be able to download. One article was written in Chinese language except the abstract was written in English-language. Thus, thirty articles were analyzed and included in this search. Twenty-six of the 30 articles have assessed the effect of different treatments on PF in patients with PFS using both clinical examination and ultrasound imaging. Eight of 26 articles used ultrasound as both an assessment tool of PF and guide therapeutic in patients with PFS. Eighteen of the 26 articles used ultrasound as only assessment technique in diagnosis of PFS. The remaining 4 articles have compared PF thickness as well as intrafascial changes using different ultrasound modes between PFS patients and healthy subjects (Fig. 1). Twenty-nine of 30 articles have evaluated the PF thickness and its changes whereas only one article has only assessed the hypoechoic area within PF using B-mode ultrasound. In addition to measuring the thickness of the PF, there were 4 of the 30 articles have assessed the stiffness of PF using sonoelastography. In 3 of the 30 articles, the vascularity of PF was monitored using color Doppler ultrasound. In 7 articles, the echogenicity of PF was separately assessed on real-time B-mode. In one of the 30 articles, the fat pad thickness combined with PF thickness were measured.
Results
Six hundred sixty-six articles were found by the search process. Of these, thirty original articles [35,36,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,62,63,64] were closely related and included in this review. The articles have assessed the PF in patients with PFS under different conditions using different ultrasound modes from 2017 to 2022 (Table 2).
Twenty-six of the 30 articles [35, 36, 38, 41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58, 60,61,62,63,64] assessed the efficacy of different treatments on PF in patients with PFS using ultrasound (Table 3). As shown in Table 3, in 8 of the 26 articles, ultrasound was used as both an evaluating modality for assessment the PF thickness along with its alterations and a guided-treatment tool in patients with PFS who underwent the different interventions. In 5 of the 8 articles, the PF thickness was assessed alone using B-mode ultrasound. In 2 of the 8 articles, the combining PF thickness and echogenicity were monitored and recorded. In one article, the B-mode and color Doppler ultrasound evaluated the PF thickness, echogenicity and vascularity.
In other 18 articles, ultrasound was used as only the assessment tool for imaging PF changes in patients with PFS before and after treatment. In 12 of the 18 articles have evaluated the PF thickness alone using B-mode ultrasound. In 4 more articles, the PF thickness along with its observation changes such as echogenicity, stiffness, vascularity or morphology were evaluated using B-mode, color Doppler or SWE. In another article, the heel fat pad thickness combined with PF thickness have been measured and recorded. The remaining one article has only investigated the hypoechoic area changes within and around PF and the size of area was recorded at pre and post intervention.
Four of the 30 articles [37, 39, 40, 59] were carried out to evaluate sonographically the PF thickness as well as fascial alterations between patients with PFS and healthy subjects that have no underwent therapeutic interventions (Table 4). One of the 4 articles has measured the PF thickness without evaluation of the fascial changes. In two more articles, combining the PF thickness and fascial stiffness were assessed using B-mode and SWE, respectively. The remaining one article was carried out to evaluate the PF thickness, stiffness and hyperemia using B-mode, SWE and color Doppler ultrasound, respectively.
Nine of the 30 articles [35, 37, 39, 40, 46, 48, 50, 59, 63] have included matched control groups. As outlined in Table 5, 7 of the 9 articles have included healthy subjects with no intervention (negative control). 4 of the 7 articles were carried out as case–control studies design having only two groups; PFS group with no intervention and healthy subjects. Other three were experimental studies as follows: one study included three groups; two of them with PFS received either treatment group or sham-treatment group (positive controls) and one group was healthy. Two studies had two groups in which one group with PFS was subjected to treatment whereas other had no PFS and had no exposure to treatment. The remaining two of the 9 studies were designed as experimental studies having two groups with PFS; one group underwent the treatment “study group” and other was subjected to sham-treatment.
Discussion
This study was carried out to systematically review published articles that assessed the PF in patients with PFS using ultrasound under different conditions from 2017 to 2022 (Table 2). Thirty studies conducted to evaluate the PF alterations and its thickness in patients with PFS underwent different intervention or compared to those with healthy subjects using different ultrasound modes such as B-mode, color Doppler or SWE. In these studies, ultrasound was used as assessment modality alone or combined with guide therapeutic for evaluation for evaluation the PFS. Based on the results of this systematic review, using ultrasound as assessment tool was available, low cost, safe and reliable in evaluating of PF changes.
In this review, all studies found that the PF thickness and/or fascial alterations was reliable in diagnosis of the PFS. In meanwhile, several differences of methods were observed among the previous studies during this review. The major differences were noted in sample size, study design, type of intervention, measurement tool and methods, sonographic features of PF (thickness, echogenicity, vascularity or stiffness) and follow-up period. In this review, majority of the reviewed articles showed that a monitoring of PF thickness and intrafascial changes are considered as a key role in the assessment of PFS using ultrasound particularly during follow-up treatment.
Assessment of PF thickness and fascial alterations after different interventions
As presented in Table 3, there 26 studies have sonographically assessed the different interventions such as injection, ESWT, manual physiotherapy, high-intensity laser therapy (HILT), low-level laser therapy (LLLT), Electroacupuncture (EA), Kinesiotaping (KT), Intense Therapeutic Ultrasound (ITU) and Monophasic Pulsed Current (MPC) in patients with PFS.
In 8 out of the 26 studies [36, 38, 42, 44, 57, 58, 62, 64], the ultrasound was used as assessment tool combined with guided treatment injection in PFS patients. These studies that were designed as randomized controlled trials showed that the use of ultrasound to guide injection and evaluate the PF changes was an effective modality. The trials assessed the efficacy of ultrasound-guided injection of different treatments in patients with PFS. All outcome measures were assessed at baseline and after treatments. The primary outcomes measured were as follows: pain by visual analog scale (VAS), daily life and exercise activities by Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), and foot function by foot function index (FFI). The secondary outcomes measured by ultrasound were PF thickness alone or combined with PF echogenicity or vascularity or both. For example, five studies [36, 42, 44, 57, 58] assessed the PF thickness alone using B-mode ultrasound at baseline and at follow-ups interventions. Other two studies [38, 62] assessed both PF thickness and fascial echogenicity in order to evaluate the effects of treatments in patients with PFS. One study [64] investigated combining PF thickness, echogenicity and vascularity using B-mode and color Doppler ultrasound in patients with PFS at pre and post intervention. All these studies concluded that ultrasound was an effective, safe, tolerable and accurate to use as a guide-therapeutic and assessment tool in evaluation of patients with PFS.
The remaining 18 articles used the ultrasound with different modes as only assessment tool to evaluate the improvements of PF thickness alone or combined with intrafascial or perifascial changes in patients with PFS undergoing different interventions. In which four articles [35, 41, 43, 53] assessed the combining PF thickness and its fascial changes using different ultrasound modes. For example, a longitudinal follow-up study [43] evaluated the PF thickness and stiffness pre and post extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in 22 patients with PFS. The PF thickness and stiffness were evaluated by B-mode and strain elastography, respectively. The PF changes was evaluated at baseline and at 1-week, 1-month, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month e after ESWT. The study concluded that PF stiffness reduced at the first week and then increased at the 12-months after treatment. However, the PF thickness decreased gradually during 12-months follow-up intervention.
In single-center, non-randomized prospective study [53], forty patients with PFS received either platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection (20 patients) or corticosteroid injection (CSI) (20 patients). The imaging assessment of the outcome measures were performed by ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, the ultrasound assessed the following outcome measures at baseline, 3 and 6 months; PF thickness and echogenicity by B-mode and neovascularization by color Doppler. The authors concluded that PF thickness has significantly reduced at 3-months after injection in both groups. The echogenicity and vascularity, however; have significantly reduced at 3- and 6-months after PRP injection only.
A double-blinded, randomized clinical trial [41] included 39 patients with PFS divided into two groups: 39 patients received polydeoxyribonucleotide (PDRN) versus 39 patients CSI. The outcomes measured by ultrasound included PF thickness and fascial echogenicity. The sonographic outcomes were evaluated at baseline and 6 months after injection. The studies concluded that PF echogenicity was significantly different within CSI group during follow-up injection whereas PF thickness did not differ intragroups. However, there were no significant different of PF thickness and echogenicity between both groups.
A prospective double-blinded randomized controlled [35] investigated the PF thickness and morphology of 22 patients divided into two groups: ESWT group and sham-ESWT group. The PF thickness and morphology of PF included (echogenicity, convexity and perifascial fluid) were assessed at baseline, 1, 4, 8 weeks after treatment. The trial revealed no changes in PF thickness pre and post intervention in both groups. However, the authors showed that alterations in the PF morphology such as decreased hypoechogenicity, increased convexity and presence perifascial fluid are considered as sonographic features of PFS.
A single-center, single-blinded, randomized clinical trial [51] conducted on 78 patients with PFS divided into two groups; 36 patients were subjected to Kinesiotaping (KT) and 42 patients were exposure to ESWT. The outcomes measured by ultrasound were PF thickness and heel fat pad thickness. The findings were monitored at baseline and 6-weeks after treatments. In both groups, the study concluded that PF thickness decreased after treatment whereas heel fat pad thickness increased.
A another single-blinded, pivotal clinical trial study [52] conducted on 33 patients with chronic PFS. The patients were exposure to intense therapeutic ultrasound (ITU) combined with standard conservative treatment at 0 (baseline), 4, 8, 12 and 26 weeks after treatments. The hypoechoic areas were only outcome measured by ultrasound. Perifascial and intrafascial hypoechoic areas/lesions were diagnosed in all patients and the size of area/lesion was measured at each follow-up visit. The study findings revealed that hypoechoic areas decreased gradually during follow-up period.
In the remaining 12 studies [45,46,47,48,49,50, 54,55,56, 60, 61, 63], different interventions were applied on different trials and different follow-up periods. In all these trials, the outcome measured by ultrasound was only PF thickness. The changes in PF thickness were different among the studies. For example, Naruseviciute and Kubilius [45], showed that the difference of PF thickness between groups after intervention was not significant. Mansiz-Kaplan et al. [46] concluded that there were improvements in PF thickness in intra – and intergroups after treatments. Xu et al. [49] found a significant improvement of PF thickness at 3- months in one group and 3- and 6- months in other group compared to the baseline values. Furthermore, a significant reduction in PF thickness was found between groups at 6-months follow-up. The remaining 8 articles stated that PF thickness was significantly improved between groups after treatments in PFS patients.
Evaluating of PF thickness and its alterations between PFS patients and healthy controls with no intervention
As shown in Table 4, Four studies [37, 39, 40, 59] compared the PF changes including thickness, stiffness and neovascularization between patients with and without PFS. Baur et al. [39] evaluated 108 unilateral PF including 87 with PFS and 21 healthy. The PF thickness, stiffness and vascularity were assessed in all subjects using B-mode, SWE and color Doppler, respectively. The study showed that shear wave velocity (SWV) and stiffness were significantly higher in healthy subjects than in patients. SWV and stiffness had sensitivity 79.31% and 80.46%, respectively; whereas had specificity 80.95% for both. The PF thickness was observed to be thicker in PFS patients than in healthy controls. There was no correlation between color Doppler and PF thickness with SWE measurements. Therefore, the study concluded that SWE represents an independent parameter in detecting PFS.
Two studies conducted by Schillizzi et al. [37] and Gatz et al. [40] compared the PF thickness and stiffness features between patients with PFS and healthy subjects and correlated the SWE values with clinical scores. The studies showed that SWE can be quantitatively assessed the stiffness of PF and can diagnose PFS changes. SWE was strongly correlated with clinical scores. The SWE measured the PF stiffness and SWV and B-mode measured the PF thickness can improve the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound in diagnosis the PFS.
Granado et al. [59] investigated and compared the effectiveness of metatarsal phalangeal (MTP) joints extension on PF thickness in 40 subjects divided into two groups (20 unilateral PFS and 20 healthy subjects). The PF thickness was evaluated at rest, 30 degrees of extension from the plantar aspect, and maximal extension as much as possible. The study found that PF thickness reduced significantly with MTP joints extension in both PFS and healthy groups. Therefore, the study concluded that PF thickness could be influenced by MTP joints extension. Thus, the researchers recommended that PF thickness should be measured with toes at rest.
Comparing the PF changes between study group and matching control
As outlined in Table 5, 9 studies with different designs [35, 37, 39, 40, 46, 48, 50, 59, 63] evaluated PF changes in patients with PFS and control groups with or without interventions. Two randomized controlled trials [35, 46] conducted to evaluate the PF changes in patients with PFS underwent different interventions for different intervals. The PFS patients were divided into two groups: treatment group and placebo group. Caner et al. [35] observed no changes in PF thickness pre and post intervention in treatment group and placebo group. However, Mansiz-Kaplan et al. [46] stated that PF was significantly thicker in treatment group than in placebo group. Four case–control studies [37, 39, 40, 59] evaluated the PF thickness and its observation changes in patients with PFS and healthy subjects with no interventions using different ultrasound modes. Three more experimental studies [48, 50, 63] investigated PF thickness alone using ultrasound in patients with PFS received a treatment and healthy volunteers. In the latter three studies, PF thickness increased in patients with PFS as well as responded to the treatment as compared to healthy subjects.
Conclusion
This study was designed to systematically review published articles from 2017 to 2022 regarding the application of the ultrasound in evaluating the PF changes in patients with PFS. When the published articles have been reviewed, many differences were noted in methodology, sample size, study design, intervention and duration of follow-up. The findings revealed that ultrasound is reliable, accurate, safe, and non-invasive imaging tool in the assessment of PF changes, therapeutic guiding and observing different treatments in patients with PFS. The most suitable site to evaluate the PFS is at the point where PF is inserted into medial calcaneal tubercle and 1 cm distal to its insertion. The longitudinal scan is considered as the best scan for imaging the PF in which the probe is placed on the line between medial tuberosity of the calcaneus and the second finger over the PF. The thickness, echogenicity, vascularization and stiffness of the PF are the most sonographic outcome measures used in the evaluation of the PFS using B-mode, color doppler and SWE (Figs. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6).
References
Angin S, Crofts G, Mickle KJ, Nester CJ (2014) Ultrasound evaluation of foot muscles and plantar fascia in pes planus. Gait Posture 40(1):48–52
Cocco G, Ricci V, Boccatonda A, Abate M, Guagnano MT, Schiavone C (2019) Ultrasound follow-up of spontaneous tears of the plantar fascia treated with conservative therapies: two case reports. Medicine 98(52): 1-4
Ehrmann C, Maier M, Mengiardi B, Pfirrmann CW, Sutter R (2014) Calcaneal attachment of the plantar fascia: MR findings in asymptomatic volunteers. Radiology 272(3):807–814
Lemont H, Ammirati KM, Usen N (2003) Plantar fasciitis: a degenerative process (fasciosis) without inflammation. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 93(3):234–237
Fuiano M, Mosca M, Caravelli S, Massimi S, Benedetti MG, Di Caprio F et al (2019) Current concepts about treatment options of plantar fibromatosis: a systematic review of the literature. Foot Ankle Surg 25(5):559–564
Oatis CA (2009) Kinesiology: the mechanics and pathomechanics of human movement. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
Aldridge T (2004) Diagnosing heel pain in adults. Am Fam Phys 70(2):332–338
Grasel R, Schweitzer M, Kovalovich A, Karasick D, Wapner K, Hecht P et al (1999) MR imaging of plantar fasciitis: edema, tears, and occult marrow abnormalities correlated with outcome. AJR Am J Roentgenol 173(3):699–701
Cleland JA, Abbott JH, Kidd MO, Stockwell S, Cheney S, Gerrard DF et al (2009) Manual physical therapy and exercise versus electrophysical agents and exercise in the management of plantar heel pain: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 39(8):573–585
Renan-Ordine R, Alburquerque-SendÍn F, Rodrigues De Souza DP, Cleland JA, Fernández-De-Las-Penas C (2011) Effectiveness of myofascial trigger point manual therapy combined with a self-stretching protocol for the management of plantar heel pain: a randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 41(2):43–50
Thomas JL, Christensen JC, Kravitz SR, Mendicino RW, Schuberth JM, Vanore JV et al (2010) The diagnosis and treatment of heel pain: a clinical practice guideline–revision 2010. J Foot Ankle Surg 49(3):S1–S19
Cotchett MP, Munteanu SE, Landorf KB (2014) Effectiveness of trigger point dry needling for plantar heel pain: a randomized controlled trial. Phys Ther 94(8):1083–1094
Martin RL, Davenport TE, Reischl SF, McPoil TG, Matheson JW, Wukich DK et al (2014) Heel pain—plantar fasciitis: revision 2014. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 44(11):A1–A33
Gordon R, Wong C, Crawford EJ (2012) Ultrasonographic evaluation of low energy extracorporeal pulse activated therapy (EPAT) for chronic plantar fasciitis. Foot Ankle Int 33(3):202–207
Urse GN (2012) Plantar fasciitis: a review. Osteopathic Family Phys 4(3):68–71
Li S, Wang K, Sun H, Luo X, Wang P, Fang S et al (2018) Clinical effects of extracorporeal shock-wave therapy and ultrasound-guided local corticosteroid injections for plantar fasciitis in adults: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medicine 97(50): 1-9
Cole C, Seto CK, Gazewood JD (2005) Plantar fasciitis: evidence-based review of diagnosis and therapy. Am Fam Phys 72(11):2237–2242
Grieve R, Palmer S (2017) Physiotherapy for plantar fasciitis: a UK-wide survey of current practice. Physiotherapy 103(2):193–200
Barrett SL, O’Malley R (1999) Plantar fasciitis and other causes of heel pain. Am Fam Phys 59(8):2200
Rachelle BM (2004) Plantar fasciitis. N Engl J Med 350(21):2159
Dubin J (2007) Evidence based treatment for plantar fasciitis. Sports Therapy. Available at http://www.docstoc.com/docs/104555757/Evidence-Based-Treatment-for-Plantar-Fasciitis. Accessed 26 Sept 2013
Roxas M. Plantar fasciitis: diagnosis and therapeutic considerations. Altern Med Rev. 2005;10(2).
Schwartz EN, Su J (2014) Plantar fasciitis: a concise review. Perm J 18(1):e105
Young CC, Rutherford DS, Niedfeldt MW (2001) Treatment of plantar fasciitis. Am Fam Physician 63(3):467
Crawford F, Thomson CE. Interventions for treating plantar heel pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003; 3.
Orchard J (2012) Plantar fasciitis. BMJ 345:1-12
Myburgh C, Larsen AH, Hartvigsen J (2008) A systematic, critical review of manual palpation for identifying myofascial trigger points: evidence and clinical significance. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 89(6):1169–1176
Association APT (2008) Heel pain–plantar fasciitis: clinical practice guildelines linked to the international classification of function, disability, and health from the orthopaedic section of the American Physical Therapy Association. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 38(4):A1–A18
Hawke F, Burns J, Radford JA, Du Toit V. Custom‐made foot orthoses for the treatment of foot pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008; 3.
Yucel U, Kucuksen S, Cingoz HT, Anlıacik E, Ozbek O, Salli A et al (2013) Full-length silicone insoles versus ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection in the management of plantar fasciitis: a randomized clinical trial. Prosthet Orthot Int 37(6):471–476
Mischke JJ, Jayaseelan DJ, Sault JD, Emerson Kavchak AJ (2017) The symptomatic and functional effects of manual physical therapy on plantar heel pain: a systematic review. J Man Manip Ther 25(1):3–10
Huffer D, Hing W, Newton R, Clair M (2017) Strength training for plantar fasciitis and the intrinsic foot musculature: A systematic review. Phys Ther Sport 24:44–52
Hyland MR, Webber-Gaffney A, Cohen L, Lichtman SW (2006) Randomized controlled trial of calcaneal taping, sham taping, and plantar fascia stretching for the short-term management of plantar heel pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 36(6):364–371
Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol 62(10):e1–e34
Caner ÖC, Güneş S, Gökmen D, Ataman Ş, Kutlay Ş (2022) The efficacy and safety of extracorporeal shock wave therapy on plantar fasciitis in patients with axial spondyloarthritis: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Rheumatol Int 42(4):581–589
Asheghan M, Hashemi SE, Hollisaz MT, Roumizade P, Hosseini SM, Ghanjal A (2021) Dextrose prolotherapy versus radial extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. Foot Ankle Surg 27(6):643–649
Schillizzi G, Alviti F, D’Ercole C, Elia D, Agostini F, Mangone M et al (2021) Evaluation of plantar fasciopathy shear wave elastography: a comparison between patients and healthy subjects. J Ultrasound 24(4):417–422
Raissi G, Arbabi A, Rafiei M, Forogh B, Babaei-Ghazani A, Khalifeh Soltani S et al (2021) Ultrasound-guided injection of dextrose versus corticosteroid in chronic plantar fasciitis management: a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. Foot Ankle Special 19:1938640020980924. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938640020980924
Baur D, Schwabl C, Kremser C, Taljanovic MS, Widmann G, Sconfienza LM et al (2021) Shear wave elastography of the plantar fascia: Comparison between patients with plantar fasciitis and healthy control subjects. J Clin Med 10(11):2351
Gatz M, Bejder L, Quack V, Schrading S, Dirrichs T, Tingart M et al (2020) Shear wave elastography (SWE) for the evaluation of patients with plantar fasciitis. Acad Radiol 27(3):363–370
Lee D-O, Yoo J-H, Cho H-I, Cho S, Cho HR (2020) Comparing effectiveness of polydeoxyribonucleotide injection and corticosteroid injection in plantar fasciitis treatment: A prospective randomized clinical study. Foot Ankle Surg 26(6):657–661
Zhao J, Luo WM, Li T (2020) Extracorporeal shock wave therapy versus corticosteroid injection for chronic plantar fasciitis: a protocol of randomized controlled trial. Medicine 99(19):1–4
Wu C-H, Lin Y-Y, Chen W-S, Wang T-G (2020) Sonoelastographic evaluation of plantar fascia after shock wave therapy for recalcitrant plantar fasciitis: a 12-month longitudinal follow-up study. Sci Rep 10(1):1–6
Raeissadat SA, Nouri F, Darvish M, Esmaily H, Ghazihosseini P (2020) Ultrasound-guided injection of high molecular weight hyaluronic acid versus corticosteroid in management of plantar fasciitis: a 24-week randomized clinical trial. J Pain Res 13:109
Naruseviciute D, Kubilius R (2020) The effect of high-intensity versus low-level laser therapy in the management of plantar fasciitis: randomized participant blind controlled trial. Clin Rehabil 34(8):1072–1082
Mansiz-Kaplan B, Nacir B, Pervane-Vural S, Duyur-Cakit B, Genc H (2020) Effect of dextrose prolotherapy on pain intensity, disability, and plantar fascia thickness in unilateral plantar fasciitis: a randomized, controlled, double-blind study. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 99(4):318–324
Alotaibi A, Petrofsky J, Daher NS, Lohman E, Syed HM, Lee H (2020) The effect of monophasic pulsed current with stretching exercise on the heel pain and plantar fascia thickness in plantar fasciitis: a randomized controlled trial. Healthcare 8(2):1–9
Aggarwal P, Jirankali V, Garg SK (2020) Evaluation of plantar fascia using high-resolution ultrasonography in clinically diagnosed cases of plantar fasciitis. Pol J Radiol 85:e375
Xu D, Jiang W, Huang D, Hu X, Wang Y, Li H et al (2020) Comparison between extracorporeal shock wave therapy and local corticosteroid injection for plantar fasciitis. Foot Ankle Int 41(2):200–205
Wang W, Liu S, Liu Y, Zang Z, Zhang W, Li L et al (2020) Efficacy of acupuncture versus sham acupuncture or waitlist control for patients with chronic plantar fasciitis: study protocol for a two-centre randomised controlled trial. BMJ Open 10(9):e036773
Tezel N, Umay E, Bulut M, Cakci A (2020) Short-term efficacy of Kinesiotaping versus extracorporeal shockwave therapy for plantar fasciitis: a randomized study. Saudi J Med Med Sci 8(3):181
Heigh E, Bohman L, Briskin G, Slayton M, Amodei R, Compton K et al (2019) Intense therapeutic ultrasound for treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis: a pivotal study exploring efficacy, safety, and patient tolerance. J Foot Ankle Surg 58(3):519–527
Jiménez-Pérez AE, Gonzalez-Arabio D, Diaz AS, Maderuelo JA, Ramos-Pascua LR (2019) Clinical and imaging effects of corticosteroids and platelet-rich plasma for the treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis: a comparative non randomized prospective study. Foot Ankle Surg 25(3):354–360
Soraganvi P, Nagakiran K, Raghavendra-Raju R, Anilkumar D, Wooly S, Basti B et al (2019) Is platelet-rich plasma injection more effective than steroid injection in the treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis in achieving long-term relief? Malays Orthopaedic j 13(3):8
Sanmak ÖDY, Külcü DG, Mesci N, Altunok EÇ (2019) Comparison of effects of low-level laser therapy and extracorporeal shock wave therapy in plantar fasciitis treatment: a randomized, prospective, single-blind clinical study. Turk J Phys Med Rehabil 65(2):184
Johannsen FE, Herzog RB, Malmgaard-Clausen NM, Hoegberget-Kalisz M, Magnusson SP, Kjaer M (2019) Corticosteroid injection is the best treatment in plantar fasciitis if combined with controlled training. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27(1):5–12
Babaei-Ghazani A, Karimi N, Forogh B, Madani SP, Ebadi S, Fadavi HR et al (2019) Comparison of ultrasound-guided local ozone (O2–O3) injection vs corticosteroid injection in the treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis: a randomized clinical trial. Pain Med 20(2):314–322
Gonnade N, Bajpayee A, Elhence A, Lokhande V, Mehta N, Mishra M et al (2018) Regenerative efficacy of therapeutic quality platelet-rich plasma injections versus phonophoresis with kinesiotaping for the treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis: a prospective randomized pilot study. Asian J Transfus Sci 12(2):105
Granado MJ, Lohman EB, Gordon KE, Daher NS (2018) Metatarsophalangeal joint extension changes ultrasound measurements for plantar fascia thickness. J Foot Ankle Res 11(1):1–7
Lai T-W, Ma H-L, Lee M-S, Chen P-M, Ku M-C (2018) Ultrasonography and clinical outcome comparison of extracorporeal shock wave therapy and corticosteroid injections for chronic plantar fasciitis: a randomized controlled trial. J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact 18(1):47
Jain SK, Suprashant K, Kumar S, Yadav A, Kearns SR (2018) Comparison of plantar fasciitis injected with platelet-rich plasma vs corticosteroids. Foot Ankle Int 39(7):780–786
Hocaoglu S, Vurdem UE, Cebicci MA, Sutbeyaz ST, Guldeste Z, Yunsuroglu SG (2017) Comparative effectiveness of radial extracorporeal shockwave therapy and ultrasound-guided local corticosteroid injection treatment for plantar fasciitis. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc 107(3):192–199
El Molla SS, Fahmy AM, Gamil AM, Ibrahim RA, Kamel MM (2021) Evaluation of plantar fasciitis improvement after shock wave therapy in calcaneal spur patients by musculoskeletal ultrasonography. Egypt Rheumatol Rehabil 48(1):1–7
El Mallah RM, Elattar EA, Zidan HF (2017) Platelet-rich plasma versus dry needling of myofascial meridian trigger points in the treatment of plantar fasciitis. Egypt Rheumatol Rehabil 44(2):58–68
Sillevis R, Shamus E, Mouttet B (2020) The management of plantar fasciitis with a musculoskeletal ultrasound imaging guided approach for instrument assisted soft tissue mobilization in a runner: a case report. Int J Sports Phys Ther 15(2):274
Acknowledgements
We thank Sarah Qahtan Mohammed Salih at Faculty of Computer Science and Information Technology/Department of Software Engineering, University Putra Malaysia for her help in performance this review.
Funding
The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to this review. The review was written by Abdul Sattar Arif Khammas. The supervision of conducting this research was performed by Rozi Mahmud. The full article was reviewed by Hasyma Abu Hassan. The articles which included in the review was selected by Idris Ibrahim. The proofreading was done Safwan Saeed Mohammed.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
There no ethical approval has applicable for this review article
Human rights and informed consent
This review does not include any study with human subjects conducted by any of the authors.
Consent to Participant
There are no participants included.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Khammas, A.S.A., Mahmud, R., Hassan, H.A. et al. An assessment of plantar fascia with ultrasound findings in patients with plantar fasciitis: a systematic review. J Ultrasound 26, 13–38 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40477-022-00712-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40477-022-00712-0