ArticleJournal of pain research2025
The Effectiveness of Acupuncture on Myofascial Trigger Points Versus Traditional Chinese Medicine Acupoints for Treating Plantar Fasciitis With Low Back Pain: A Study Protocol for a Randomised Clinical Trial.
Article in Journal of pain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of extracorporeal shock wave therapy targeting the posterior myofascial chain and plantar tenderness points versus plantar tenderness points alone in patients with plantar fasciitis: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Trial
- Neuroregulatory mechanism of heat-sensitive moxibustion on the Dubi acupoint (ST 35) in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging study.Frontiers in neurologyTrial
- Article
- The Effectiveness of Acupuncture on Myofascial Trigger Points versus Traditional Chinese Medicine Acupoints for Treating Plantar Fasciitis with Low Back Pain: A Study Protocol for a Randomised Clinical Trial [Letter].Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- The Effectiveness of Acupuncture on Myofascial Trigger Points Versus Traditional Chinese Medicine Acupoints for Treating Plantar Fasciitis With Low Back Pain: A Study Protocol for a Randomised Clinical Trial [Letter].Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- The Effectiveness of Acupuncture on Myofascial Trigger Points Versus Traditional Chinese Medicine Acupoints for Treating Plantar Fasciitis With Low Back Pain: A Study Protocol for a Randomised Clinical Trial [Letter].Journal of pain research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Plantar fasciitis is a common cause of heel pain, often associated with a higher rate of low back pain. This increased disability rate in low back pain may be correlated with reduced foot and ankle function. While both acupuncture and trigger point dry needling have been reported as potentially effective treatments for plantar fasciitis, the quality of evidence is currently low. Acupuncture at trigger points might be a promising treatment for plantar fasciitis, though there is a lack of evidence supporting its effectiveness. This trial aims to compare the effectiveness of acupuncture at trigger points versus Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) acupoints in the treatment of participants with plantar fasciitis and low back pain. Methods: The trial will be a single-centre, parallel two-group, randomised controlled trial with 62 participants allocated in a 1:1 ratio to either the trigger point group or the TCM acupoint group. Patients with plantar fasciitis and low back pain will be enrolled in this trial. Eligible participants will receive acupuncture for 30 minutes per session over 8 total sessions, with a 12-week follow-up period. The primary outcome measure will be the change from baseline in the worst first-step pain intensity in the morning after treatment. Secondary outcomes include changes from baseline in foot and low back pain, foot and low back function, plantar fascia thickness, and participants' self-reported global improvement. Statistical analysis will be conducted using a two-sided test with a significance level of 0.05 and 95% confidence intervals. Clinical Trial Registration: This trial has been registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry. Registration number: ChiCTR2300067552. Registration date: 1 January 2023.
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.