ArticleJournal of foot and ankle research2025
Plantar Heel Pain Management: A Survey of UK Registered Healthcare Professionals.
Article in Journal of foot and ankle research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Plantar Heel Pain Management: A Survey of UK Registered Healthcare Professionals.Journal of foot and ankle 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
Abstract
backgroundMultiple healthcare professions are involved in the management of plantar heel pain (PHP). Professional diversity can lead to varied practice and treatment choices. Understanding PHP management can aid clinical benchmarking, inform knowledge mobilisation strategies, and may support shared decision making between patients and referrers. This study explored the management of plantar heel pain by United Kingdom (UK) registered healthcare professionals.
methodsA cross-sectional, online survey using the Jisc Online Surveys platform. The survey was distributed to UK healthcare practitioners via digital channels, including professional bodies, special interest groups and social media.
resultsFour hundred and six professionals responded, predominantly podiatrists (181; 44.6%) and physiotherapists (144; 36.5%). The remaining 18% comprised orthotists, osteopaths, orthopaedic surgeons, General Practitioners (GPs), nurses, rheumatologists, sport and exercise rehabilitation specialists, and a consultant in sport and exercise medicine. Most respondents (247; 60.8%) did not commonly use imaging to guide PHP management. The majority (359; 88.4%) provided physical interventions: strengthening (88%), stretching (85.5%) and balance (65.2%) were frequently used. Prefabricated orthoses (56.3%) were more frequently used than custom orthoses (24.2%). Treatments employed by podiatrists and physiotherapists were similar. Advice on nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (226; 83%), and simple analgesics (e.g., paracetamol) (221; 81%) to manage pain was commonly provided. Only 6.4% frequently performed steroid injections. Patient information was commonly provided (359; 88%); however, most practitioners (297; 83%) lacked resources in languages other than English.
conclusionHealthcare professionals in the UK favour exercise and prefabricated orthoses when managing PHP.
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.