Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025
Comparison of extracorporeal shock wave therapy and high-intensity laser therapy in the treatment of calcaneal spur-related symptoms: clinical outcomes and functional improvement.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Karakuzu Güngör Zeynep
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) and high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) in managing calcaneal spur-related symptoms. These non-invasive modalities were compared in terms of their ability to reduce pain and improve functional outcomes.
METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, patients diagnosed with calcaneal spur based on clinical and radiographic findings were randomly assigned to receive ESWT or HILT. Participants were randomized into two groups to receive either ESWT or HILT, complemented by standardized exercise regimens. Pain intensity was measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and functional outcomes were assessed with the Foot Function Index (FFI) at baseline, post-treatment, and three months post-treatment.
RESULTS: Both groups showed significant improvements in pain and functional outcomes. In the ESWT group, VAS scores for initial step pain decreased from 7.8 ± 1.0 to 4.0 ± 1.0 post-treatment and further to 3.4 ± 1.0 at three months (p = 0.002). The HILT group demonstrated a similar trend, with scores reducing from 7.5 ± 1.2 to 4.2 ± 1.1 post-treatment and 3.5 ± 0.9 at follow-up (p = 0.001). Total FFI scores improved significantly in both groups, with the ESWT group showing a larger reduction (58.8 to 19.7; p = 0.033) compared to the HILT group (57.4 to 35.4; p = 0.046). No significant adverse events were reported in either group.
CONCLUSION: ESWT and HILT are effective non-invasive options for treating calcaneal spur with ESWT providing slightly greater functional benefits.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.
METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, patients diagnosed with calcaneal spur based on clinical and radiographic findings were randomly assigned to receive ESWT or HILT. Participants were randomized into two groups to receive either ESWT or HILT, complemented by standardized exercise regimens. Pain intensity was measured using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and functional outcomes were assessed with the Foot Function Index (FFI) at baseline, post-treatment, and three months post-treatment.
RESULTS: Both groups showed significant improvements in pain and functional outcomes. In the ESWT group, VAS scores for initial step pain decreased from 7.8 ± 1.0 to 4.0 ± 1.0 post-treatment and further to 3.4 ± 1.0 at three months (p = 0.002). The HILT group demonstrated a similar trend, with scores reducing from 7.5 ± 1.2 to 4.2 ± 1.1 post-treatment and 3.5 ± 0.9 at follow-up (p = 0.001). Total FFI scores improved significantly in both groups, with the ESWT group showing a larger reduction (58.8 to 19.7; p = 0.033) compared to the HILT group (57.4 to 35.4; p = 0.046). No significant adverse events were reported in either group.
CONCLUSION: ESWT and HILT are effective non-invasive options for treating calcaneal spur with ESWT providing slightly greater functional benefits.
CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.