Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32513018›Full record

Trial reportClinical rehabilitation2020

The effect of high-intensity versus low-level laser therapy in the management of plantar fasciitis: randomized participant blind controlled trial.

Dovile Naruseviciute, Raimondas Kubilius

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readComparative StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06371547 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Efficiency of Different Types of Stretching Exercises on Gastrocnemius Tightness

TypeinterventionalSponsorBitlis Eren UniversityRan2024 to 2024Enrolled48ConditionsMuscle TightnessArmsStretching Exercise
NCT07287046 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

A Comparison of Efficacy Between High-intensity Laser Therapy and Focused Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in Patient With Plantar Fasciitis; Single Blinded Randomize Controlled Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorMahidol UniversityRan2026 to 2027Enrolled28ConditionsPlantar FasciitisArmsHigh power Laser therapy, Focused extracorporeal shock wave therapy
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Dovile NaruseviciuteDepartment of Rehabilitation, The Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0347-1572
Raimondas KubiliusDepartment of Rehabilitation, The Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania.
Lithuanian University of Health Sciences · LT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate and compare the efficacy of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) for plantar fasciitis.

designA participant blind randomized controlled trial with parallel group design and an active comparator with follow-up at four weeks. SETTINGS: Outpatient, University hospital. SUBJECTS: Unilateral plantar fasciitis participants (

interventionsInterventions included eight sessions of laser therapy over three weeks and single session of patient education. The HILT group ( MAIN MEASURES: Primary outcomes: visual analogue scale; secondary outcomes: pressure algometry, sonography of plantar fascia thickness (time frame: baseline to three-week and four-week follow-up) and numeric rating scale (0%-100%) for opinion of participants on effect of treatment (time frame: three weeks). Data presented: mean (SD) or

resultsThere was no statistically significant difference between the groups according to visual analogue scale (pain in general reduction in three weeks: 2.57(3.45) vs. 2.88(3.28) cm), pressure algometry (pain threshold difference between healthy and affected heel reduction in three weeks: 1.80(6.39) vs. 1.77(2.85) kg) and sonography measurements (plantar fascia thickness difference between healthy and affected heel reduction in three weeks: 0.19(0.56) vs. 0.30(0.57) mm). There was a statistically significant difference between the groups in participants' opinion in favor to HILT group (efficacy of treatment better than 50%: 26(51%) vs. 37(73%)).

conclusionNo statistically significant difference between groups was observed.

Indexed as

Low-Level Light TherapyAdultAgedFasciitis, PlantarFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementPatient Outcome AssessmentTreatment OutcomeUltrasonographyVisual Analog Scalefasciitishigh-intensity laser therapyLaser therapylow-level laser therapyphototherapyplantar

Identifiers

PMID32513018
PMCPMC7372589
OpenAlexW3033779219

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.