Trial reportIranian journal of medical sciences2024
Comparison of High-intensity Laser Therapy with Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in the Treatment of Patients with Plantar Fasciitis: A Double-blind Randomized Clinical Trial.
Trial report in Iranian journal of medical sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07287046 (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), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
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
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of laser therapy and extracorporeal shock wave therapy in the treatment of patients with plantar fasciitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.Lasers in medical science · 2026Pooled it
- The importance of power in photobiomodulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of high-intensity laser therapy.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2026Pooled it
- Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy versus laser therapy in treating musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Lasers in medical science · 2025Pooled it
- A Narrative Review of Shockwave Therapy in Plantar Fasciitis.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2026Review
- Effect of Local Laser Therapy on Plantar Fasciitis: A Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- High-Intensity Laser Therapy Versus Extracorporeal Shockwave Therapy for Plantar Fasciitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Comparative Effectiveness of Conservative Therapies for Plantar Fasciitis: A Retrospective Observational Study.Sports (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Reduction of surgical-site infections and improvement of scar parameters with a uniform fractional ultra-pulse CO₂ laser protocol in cosmetic surgery: a five-center retrospective cohort.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Letter to the Editor regarding "Comparison of High-intensity Laser Therapy with Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy in the Treatment of Patients with Plantar Fasciitis: A Double-blind Randomized Clinical Trial".Iranian journal of medical sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The most common cause of heel pain is plantar fasciitis (PF). Although conservative treatments relieve pain in more than 90% of patients, it may remain painful in some cases. This study aimed to compare High-intensity Laser Therapy (HILT) with Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) in patients with PF. Methods: In this double-blinded randomized clinical trial (conducted in Yazd, Iran, from May 2020 to March 2021), patients were classified into two groups, including the ESWT and HILT, using online randomization. Nine sessions, three times a week for 3 weeks, were the treatment period in both groups. Visual Analogue Score (VAS), Heel Tenderness Index (HTI), and the SF36 questionnaire were compared and analyzed statistically at the beginning and 9 months after treatment. Results: 38 patients (19 in each group) completed the study. Results showed that pain and patient satisfaction improved significantly 3 months after treatment. The VAS and HTI decreased 3 months after treatment in both groups, which was statistically significant (P<0.001). The SF36 score in both groups increased 3 months after treatment, and this increase was statistically significant (P<0.001). Although the two modalities were effective based on VAS, HTI, and SF36, a significant statistical difference was observed between them (P=0.03, P=0.006, P=0.002, respectively), and the HILT was more effective. Conclusion: ESWT and HILT decrease pain and increase patient satisfaction in PF. Besides, both methods are non-invasive and safe. However, there is a significant difference between them, and HILT is more effective.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.