3.9 Article

Effect of stretching with and without muscle strengthening exercises for the foot and hip in patients with plantar fasciitis: A randomized controlled single-blind clinical trial

Journal

MANUAL THERAPY
Volume 23, Issue -, Pages 76-82

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2015.10.006

Keywords

Plantar fasciitis; Muscle stretching exercises; Resistance training; Randomized controlled trial

Categories

Funding

  1. Coordenacao de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nivel Superior (CAPES)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To compare the effect of stretching with and without muscle strengthening of the foot alone or foot and hip on pain and function in patients with plantar fasciitis. Design: Single blind randomized controlled trial. Method: Eighty-three patients with plantar fasciitis were allocated to one of three treatment options for an eight-week period: Foot Exercise Group (FEG - extrinsic and intrinsic foot muscles), Foot and Hip Exercise Group (FHEG - abductor and lateral rotator muscles) and Stretching Alone Exercise Group (SAEG). Main measures: A visual analog scale for pain, the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score and the Star Excursion Balance Test. All evaluations were performed before treatment and after the last treatment session. Results: Improvements were found in all groups regarding the visual analog scale, the pain, activities of daily living, sports and recreation, quality of life (p < 0.001) and other symptoms (p < 0.01) subscales of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score as well as posterolateral movement, posteromedial movement and composite score (p < 0.001) on the Star Excursion Balance Test. No time-group interactions were found for any of the variables (p > 0.05). Conclusions: All three exercise protocols analyzed led to improvements at eight-week follow-up in pain, function and dynamic lower limb stability in patients with plantar fasciitis. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available