Comparative efficacy of corticosteroid injection and non-invasive treatments for plantar fasciitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Chien Min Chen*, Meng Lee, Chia Hung Lin, Chia Hao Chang, Chu Hsu Lin

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal Article peer-review

26 Scopus citations

Abstract

The first choice of treatment for patients with plantar fasciitis is non-invasive treatment, rather than corticosteroid injection (CSI). However, no comprehensive study has compared the effectiveness of CSI with non-invasive treatments for plantar fasciitis. We conducted a meta-analysis comparing CSI and non-invasive treatment effects on plantar fasciitis. The primary outcome was pain reduction. Nine randomized controlled trials comparing CSI with 4 non-invasive treatment types were included. A trend favoring CSI over non-invasive treatments was indicated regarding reduction in the visual analogue scale (VAS) score at 1-1.5 (mean difference (MD), 1.70; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.39-3.01; P = 0.01) and 2-3 months (MD, 1.67; 95% CI = 0.58-2.76; P = 0.003). At 1.5-month follow-up, CSI was associated with improved VAS score compared with physical therapy (PT) (MD, 2.5; 95% CI = 0.1-4.9; P = 0.04). No significant differences in the VAS score reduction were observed between CSI and shock wave therapy within 3 months. In summary, CSI tends to be more effective for pain reduction than non-invasive treatments within 3 months. Moreover, CSI provides significant pain relief at 1.5 months after treatment compared with PT. This study provides important clinical information for selecting therapeutics.

Original languageEnglish
Article number4033
JournalScientific Reports
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 01 12 2018
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 The Author(s).

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative efficacy of corticosteroid injection and non-invasive treatments for plantar fasciitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this