Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38802489›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2024

Effects of cassava wax bath as a new therapeutic approach on patients with plantar fasciitis: a double-blind, randomised clinical trial.

Vitsarut Buttagat, Sittiporn Punyanitya, Rawiwan Charoensup, Supapon Kaewsanmung, Pattanasin Areeudomwong, Sujittra Kluayhomthong

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Effects of cassava wax immersion on pain, pressure pain threshold, and upper extremity function among patients with trigger finger.Hong Kong physiotherapy journal : official publication of the Hong Kong Physiotherapy Association Limited = Wu li chih liao · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
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

6 authors.

Vitsarut ButtagatDepartment of Physical Therapy, School of Integrative Medicine, Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, 57100, Thailand. vitsarut.but@mfu.ac.th.
Sittiporn PunyanityaSchool of Medicine, Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, 57100, Thailand.
Rawiwan CharoensupDepartment of Applied Thai Traditional Medicine, School of Integrative Medicine, Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, 57100, Thailand.
Supapon KaewsanmungDepartment of Physical Therapy, School of Integrative Medicine, Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, 57100, Thailand.
Pattanasin AreeudomwongDepartment of Physical Therapy, School of Integrative Medicine, Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, 57100, Thailand.
Sujittra KluayhomthongDepartment of Physical Therapy, School of Integrative Medicine, Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, 57100, Thailand. sujittra.klu@mfu.ac.th.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of a new therapeutic approach (cassava wax bath: CWB) compared with usual care (paraffin wax bath: PWB) in patients with plantar fasciitis (PF). Forty patients with PF were recruited into the study (CWB group, n = 20, PWB group, n = 20). Patients in the CWB group received cassava wax bath and patients in the PWB group received usual care (PWB). The primary outcome was pain intensity (PI). The secondary outcomes were the pressure pain threshold (PPT), pain frequency (PFr), foot and ankle ability measure (FAAM), and ankle dorsiflexion range of motion (ADROM). All outcomes were assessed before and after the five-week intervention, one month, and three months after the intervention period. After the intervention, statistically significant improvement was found in all outcomes after the intervention period and during the one month and three months follow-up study in both groups (P < 0.05). For all outcomes, no between-group differences were seen at any post-assessment time-point, except for PFr (P < 0.05). In conclusion, the findings of this study indicate that CWB was significantly superior to PWB in reducing PFr. For the other outcomes, CWB and PWB were both equally effective in reducing PI and increasing PPT, FAAM, and ADROM in patients with PF. Therefore, CWB might be considered as a novel useful therapeutic option for PF patients.Trial registration: Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR) (Identification number: TCTR20220128002), First posted date: 28/01/2022.

Indexed as

Fasciitis, PlantarManihotAdultBathsDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPain MeasurementRange of Motion, ArticularTreatment OutcomeWaxesWaxes

Identifiers

PMID38802489
PMCPMC11130329

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.