Comparison of custom and prefabricated orthoses in the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis

Glenn Pfeffer, Peter Bacchetti, Johnathan Deland, Al Lewis, Robert Anderson, William Davis, Richard Alvarez, James Brodsky, Paul Cooper, Carol Frey, Richard Herrick, Mark Myerson, James Sammarco, Chet Janecki, Steven Ross, Michael Bowman, Ronald Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

242 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Fifteen centers for orthopaedic treatment of the foot and ankle participated in a prospective randomized trial to compare several nonoperative treatments for proximal plantar fascilits (heel pain syndrome). Included were 236 patients (160 women and 76 men) who were 16 years of age or older. Most reported duration of symptoms of 6 months or less. Patients with systemic disease, significant musculoskeletal complaints, sciatica, or local nerve entrapment were excluded. We randomized patients prospectively into five different treatment groups. All groups performed Achilles tendon- and plantar fascia-stretching in a similar manner. One group was treated with stretching only. The other four groups stretched and used one of four different shoe inserts, including a silicone heel pad, a felt pad, a rubber heel cup, or a custom-made polypropylene orthotic device. Patients were reevaluated after 8 weeks of treatment. The percentages improved in each group were: (1) silicone insert, 95%; (2) rubber insert, 88%; (3) felt insert, 81%; (4) stretching only, 72%; and (5) custom orthosis, 68%. Combining all the patients who used a prefabricated insert, we found that their improvement rates were higher than those assigned to stretching only (P = 0.022) and those who stretched and used a custom orthosis (P = 0.0074). We conclude that, when used in conjunction with a stretching program, a prefabricated shoe insert is more likely to produce improvement in symptoms as part of the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis than a custom polypropylene orthotic device.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)214-221
Number of pages8
JournalFoot and Ankle International
Volume20
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1999

Fingerprint

Plantar Fasciitis
Orthotic Devices
Heel
Shoes
Polypropylenes
Rubber
Silicones
Musculoskeletal Diseases
Nerve Compression Syndromes
Therapeutics
Sciatica
Achilles Tendon
Fascia
Ankle
Orthopedics
Foot
Pain

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Surgery
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Pfeffer, G., Bacchetti, P., Deland, J., Lewis, A., Anderson, R., Davis, W., ... Smith, R. (1999). Comparison of custom and prefabricated orthoses in the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis. Foot and Ankle International, 20(4), 214-221. https://doi.org/10.1177/107110079902000402

Comparison of custom and prefabricated orthoses in the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis. / Pfeffer, Glenn; Bacchetti, Peter; Deland, Johnathan; Lewis, Al; Anderson, Robert; Davis, William; Alvarez, Richard; Brodsky, James; Cooper, Paul; Frey, Carol; Herrick, Richard; Myerson, Mark; Sammarco, James; Janecki, Chet; Ross, Steven; Bowman, Michael; Smith, Ronald.

In: Foot and Ankle International, Vol. 20, No. 4, 01.01.1999, p. 214-221.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Pfeffer, G, Bacchetti, P, Deland, J, Lewis, A, Anderson, R, Davis, W, Alvarez, R, Brodsky, J, Cooper, P, Frey, C, Herrick, R, Myerson, M, Sammarco, J, Janecki, C, Ross, S, Bowman, M & Smith, R 1999, 'Comparison of custom and prefabricated orthoses in the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis', Foot and Ankle International, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 214-221. https://doi.org/10.1177/107110079902000402
Pfeffer, Glenn ; Bacchetti, Peter ; Deland, Johnathan ; Lewis, Al ; Anderson, Robert ; Davis, William ; Alvarez, Richard ; Brodsky, James ; Cooper, Paul ; Frey, Carol ; Herrick, Richard ; Myerson, Mark ; Sammarco, James ; Janecki, Chet ; Ross, Steven ; Bowman, Michael ; Smith, Ronald. / Comparison of custom and prefabricated orthoses in the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis. In: Foot and Ankle International. 1999 ; Vol. 20, No. 4. pp. 214-221.
@article{aba2433b690c4d708371e09cca6a693d,
title = "Comparison of custom and prefabricated orthoses in the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis",
abstract = "Fifteen centers for orthopaedic treatment of the foot and ankle participated in a prospective randomized trial to compare several nonoperative treatments for proximal plantar fascilits (heel pain syndrome). Included were 236 patients (160 women and 76 men) who were 16 years of age or older. Most reported duration of symptoms of 6 months or less. Patients with systemic disease, significant musculoskeletal complaints, sciatica, or local nerve entrapment were excluded. We randomized patients prospectively into five different treatment groups. All groups performed Achilles tendon- and plantar fascia-stretching in a similar manner. One group was treated with stretching only. The other four groups stretched and used one of four different shoe inserts, including a silicone heel pad, a felt pad, a rubber heel cup, or a custom-made polypropylene orthotic device. Patients were reevaluated after 8 weeks of treatment. The percentages improved in each group were: (1) silicone insert, 95{\%}; (2) rubber insert, 88{\%}; (3) felt insert, 81{\%}; (4) stretching only, 72{\%}; and (5) custom orthosis, 68{\%}. Combining all the patients who used a prefabricated insert, we found that their improvement rates were higher than those assigned to stretching only (P = 0.022) and those who stretched and used a custom orthosis (P = 0.0074). We conclude that, when used in conjunction with a stretching program, a prefabricated shoe insert is more likely to produce improvement in symptoms as part of the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis than a custom polypropylene orthotic device.",
author = "Glenn Pfeffer and Peter Bacchetti and Johnathan Deland and Al Lewis and Robert Anderson and William Davis and Richard Alvarez and James Brodsky and Paul Cooper and Carol Frey and Richard Herrick and Mark Myerson and James Sammarco and Chet Janecki and Steven Ross and Michael Bowman and Ronald Smith",
year = "1999",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/107110079902000402",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "20",
pages = "214--221",
journal = "Foot and Ankle International",
issn = "1071-1007",
publisher = "AOFAS - American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of custom and prefabricated orthoses in the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis

AU - Pfeffer, Glenn

AU - Bacchetti, Peter

AU - Deland, Johnathan

AU - Lewis, Al

AU - Anderson, Robert

AU - Davis, William

AU - Alvarez, Richard

AU - Brodsky, James

AU - Cooper, Paul

AU - Frey, Carol

AU - Herrick, Richard

AU - Myerson, Mark

AU - Sammarco, James

AU - Janecki, Chet

AU - Ross, Steven

AU - Bowman, Michael

AU - Smith, Ronald

PY - 1999/1/1

Y1 - 1999/1/1

N2 - Fifteen centers for orthopaedic treatment of the foot and ankle participated in a prospective randomized trial to compare several nonoperative treatments for proximal plantar fascilits (heel pain syndrome). Included were 236 patients (160 women and 76 men) who were 16 years of age or older. Most reported duration of symptoms of 6 months or less. Patients with systemic disease, significant musculoskeletal complaints, sciatica, or local nerve entrapment were excluded. We randomized patients prospectively into five different treatment groups. All groups performed Achilles tendon- and plantar fascia-stretching in a similar manner. One group was treated with stretching only. The other four groups stretched and used one of four different shoe inserts, including a silicone heel pad, a felt pad, a rubber heel cup, or a custom-made polypropylene orthotic device. Patients were reevaluated after 8 weeks of treatment. The percentages improved in each group were: (1) silicone insert, 95%; (2) rubber insert, 88%; (3) felt insert, 81%; (4) stretching only, 72%; and (5) custom orthosis, 68%. Combining all the patients who used a prefabricated insert, we found that their improvement rates were higher than those assigned to stretching only (P = 0.022) and those who stretched and used a custom orthosis (P = 0.0074). We conclude that, when used in conjunction with a stretching program, a prefabricated shoe insert is more likely to produce improvement in symptoms as part of the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis than a custom polypropylene orthotic device.

AB - Fifteen centers for orthopaedic treatment of the foot and ankle participated in a prospective randomized trial to compare several nonoperative treatments for proximal plantar fascilits (heel pain syndrome). Included were 236 patients (160 women and 76 men) who were 16 years of age or older. Most reported duration of symptoms of 6 months or less. Patients with systemic disease, significant musculoskeletal complaints, sciatica, or local nerve entrapment were excluded. We randomized patients prospectively into five different treatment groups. All groups performed Achilles tendon- and plantar fascia-stretching in a similar manner. One group was treated with stretching only. The other four groups stretched and used one of four different shoe inserts, including a silicone heel pad, a felt pad, a rubber heel cup, or a custom-made polypropylene orthotic device. Patients were reevaluated after 8 weeks of treatment. The percentages improved in each group were: (1) silicone insert, 95%; (2) rubber insert, 88%; (3) felt insert, 81%; (4) stretching only, 72%; and (5) custom orthosis, 68%. Combining all the patients who used a prefabricated insert, we found that their improvement rates were higher than those assigned to stretching only (P = 0.022) and those who stretched and used a custom orthosis (P = 0.0074). We conclude that, when used in conjunction with a stretching program, a prefabricated shoe insert is more likely to produce improvement in symptoms as part of the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis than a custom polypropylene orthotic device.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032933642&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032933642&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/107110079902000402

DO - 10.1177/107110079902000402

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 214

EP - 221

JO - Foot and Ankle International

JF - Foot and Ankle International

SN - 1071-1007

IS - 4

ER -