Paper
Comparison of Customised Foot Orthosis and Prefabricated Foot Orthosis in the Management of Plantar Fasciitis: A Systematic Review
- Authors:
- Omar Farouk Helal; Wong Wai Man; Mansour Abdullah Alshehri
- Abstract
- Background: Plantar fasciitis (PF) is one of the most common foot conditions. It has a negative impact on foot function and limits daily activities. Among all conservative interventions, foot orthosis is widely used for the management of PF. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of customised foot orthosis (CFO) and prefabricated foot orthosis (PFO) on pain and function in people with PF. Research Strategy: Medline, Embase, CINAHL Plus, AMED and SPORTDiscus databases were searched from 2008 (the date of the latest relevant systematic review) to July 2016. Study Selection: Original research trials that met these criteria were included: (1) published randomised controlled trials, (2) participants diagnosed with PF, (3) evaluation of the effectiveness of both CFO and PFO, (4) and pain and/or function as outcome measures. Data Extraction: PRISMA guidelines were employed to extract relevant data from trials that matched the inclusion criteria and two independent reviewers assessed the quality of studies. Results: A total of 631 studies were screened, and in the final process of selection, only two studies met the inclusion criteria. Both studies demonstrated that the use of foot orthosis in people with PF was associated with a greater improvement about pain and function. Also, both studies found that CFO produced similar effects compared to PFO, based on self-reported questionnaires results, such as visual analogue scale (VAS), foot function index (FFI) and 36-Item short form health survey (SF-36). One of the studies used an objective measurement tool to monitor participants’ activities by using a body-worn sensor and found that CFO was over PFO regarding episodes of walking and sit-to-stand duration. However, Meta-analysis of FFI scores showed that CFO was not statistically greater than PFO on pain (SMD −0.09, 95% CI −0.41 to 0.24; P=0.60) and function (SMD −0.18, 95% CI −0.50 to 0.15; P=0.29). Conclusion: There is moderate evidence to show that CFO was as effective as PFO for treating PF in the short term, while the weak evidence showed that CFO was more effective than PFO. However, the long-term effect of both interventions remains unclear. Further well-structured studies with extended follow-up periods and the use of objective measurements are therefore recommended.
- Keywords
- Plantar Fasciitis; Heel Pain; Foot Orthosis; Customised Foot Orthosis; Prefabricated Foot Orthosis
- StartPage
- 34
- EndPage
- 42
- Doi
- 10.18005/PTHP0401006