ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT06754982TDPSFPFMRUpdated Mar 27, 2025

Temporal Differences in Pain, Muscle Stiffness, and Function in Subjects With Plantar Fasciitis After Myofascial Release Therapy

An interventional study of Myofascial release in Plantar Fasciitis of Both Feet, sponsored by Universidad Católica del Maule. Recruiting at 1 site in Chile. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 60 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-03-27.

Sponsored by Universidad Católica del Maule · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Jan 2025; still recruiting 1 year 9 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
50
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 60 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Plantar fasciitis (PF) is a common condition in the population. One of the interventions used to resolve this condition is myofascial release (MR), which consists of massages that help reduce pain and increase mobility. MR has shown efficacy when applied for 30 minutes, however, it is necessary to compare it with a 15-minute MR intervention, since in clinical practice optimizing time is essential. Accordingly, the present research seeks to evaluate whether there are differences in the application time of myofascial release in people with PF.

Read the detailed description

Plantar fasciitis (PF) is an acute inflammation of the fascia resulting from degenerative irritation from the median tuberosity of the heel bone to surrounding perifascial structures. Histological findings include granulation tissue, microtears, collagen disorders, and in particular a lack of normal inflammation. It is one of the most common causes of musculoskeletal pain, with a population prevalence in adults aged 50 years or older of 9.6% (95% CI: 8.8 to 10.5) and a population prevalence of disabling pain of 7.9% (95% CI: 7.1 to 8.7), slightly more present in women than in men, with a history of knee, hip, and back pain. It is characterized by pain on the first step and pain during weight-bearing tasks, particularly after periods of rest. Among the possible low-cost and noninvasive treatments that have shown efficacy Manual therapy (MT) is a popular treatment for PF. TM includes treatments such as joint and soft tissue mobilizations, manipulations, myofascial trigger point release, and stretch-contraction-relaxation. In particular, myofascial release is a gradual soft tissue stretching by the clinician that is guided entirely by feedback from the recipient's body to determine the direction, strength, and duration of the stretch to address specific soft tissue restrictions.

TM has been frequently used to treat PF, systematic reviews have reported positive results on pain, function, and pressure pain threshold, but suggest that they should be viewed with caution due to poor methodological quality, intervention heterogeneity in dosing (frequency, intensity, and duration), techniques, and outcome measures, and the frequent use of secondary manual therapy co-interventions. The application of myofascial release is varied in the number of procedures, application time of each technique and total application time of the intervention, without a clear justification regarding the decision of each of these options. A clinical trial applied a protocol for 4 weeks, where each session was performed in 30 minutes, and demonstrated that myofascial release is more effective than the control group, presenting a change in the average pressure pain threshold of 1.3 kg/cm2 at the end of the 4-week treatment. This change is considered clinically important, given that in the literature it has been reported that this difference is > 1.16 kg/cm2. However, the reason for the time used, the number of techniques and the choice of techniques is not justified. In addition, there are no investigations in the literature on the specific effect of myofascial release with a shorter application time in PF. On the other hand, studies with deep massage, a manual therapy technique, combined with flexibility exercise has proven to be effective with an execution time of 10 minutes. Under this context and considering that in clinical practice the optimization of times is essential, it is relevant to carry out a clinical equivalence trial that allows to determine the efficacy of isolated myofascial release in PF, with a 30-minute intervention protocol already carried out and that demonstrated positive effects on the pressure pain threshold, contrasted with a time of less than 15 minutes. Given the context raised, the question arises: In participants with plantar fasciitis, would the application of a myofascial release treatment for 15 minutes have equivalent effects to myofascial release applied for 30 minutes, in the pain and stiffness of the gastrocnemius muscle?

02

Conditions studied

  • Plantar Fasciitis of Both Feet

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Plantar fasciitis
  • Myofascial release
  • manual therapy
03

In context

Fasciitis, Plantar

223 studies on the registry are indexed under Fasciitis, Plantar; 58 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 50 is below the median of 56 across 194 interventional studies indexed under Fasciitis, Plantar.

Browse Fasciitis, Plantar studies →

Lead sponsor

Universidad Católica del Maule is the lead sponsor of 21 studies on the registry; 9 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 60 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Study participants must be diagnosed with PF
  • Age between 18 to 60 years a clinical diagnosis of unilateral PF according to the clinical practice guidelines of the orthopedic section of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA).
  • Pain intensity > 2 on the numerical pain rating scale (NPRS).
  • Pain that is most intense upon awakening and decreases during walking. • Duration of pain greater than 3 months and less than 7 months.
  • Both sexes.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Who have received ankle or foot interventions within the previous three months, such as physical therapy (manual therapy, exercise, physical agents), injections, long-term history of use.
  • History of surgery on the ankle, foot, or inner leg.
  • Other causes of heel pain: arthritic (fibromyalgia, gout, rheumatoid arthritis, seronegative spondyloarthropathies), infectious (diabetic ulcers, osteomyelitis, plantar warts), neurological (lumbar radiculopathy (L4-S2), nerve entrapment (branches of posterior tibial nerve), neuroma, tarsal tunnel syndrome, (posterior tibial nerve), trauma (calcaneal stress fracture), tumor (Ewing's sarcoma, neuroma), vascular and pregnancy.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Corticosteroids (steroids)

Anti-inflammatory medicines such as prednisone, prednisolone and dexamethasone — not the anabolic steroids used for muscle.

Studies differ in what they allow: check which steroid medicines, routes (tablets, injections, creams, inhalers, eye drops) and doses this study accepts.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
50 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Group 15 minutes

    The group will receive 15 minutes of myofascial release. Each intervention will be performed only on the affected limb. 9 myofascial release techniques will be applied to each group, each procedure will last 1 minute and 40 seconds.

    Other: Myofascial release

  • Experimental
    Gruops 30 minutes

    The group will receive 30 minutes of myofascial release. Each intervention will be performed only on the affected limb. Nine myofascial release techniques will be applied to each group, each procedure will last 3 minutes and 20 seconds.

    Other: Myofascial release

Interventions

  • OtherMyofascial release

    Nine myofascial release techniques will be applied to each group: Transverse hamstring play; Transverse hamstring and adductor magnus play: posterior to anterior pressure; Transverse gastrocnemius-soleus play; Tibia bone clearing: posterior tibia; Tibia bone clearing: prone grip with half chisel; Lateral fascial distraction of the tibia; Lateral elongation of the peroneal tissue; Cross-friction of the gastrocnemius-soleus musculotendinous junction; Manipulation of the plantar fascia.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Morning pain intensity measured with the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS)

    The Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) measures pain intensity from 0 to 11 points (0, no pain; 10, worst pain imaginable).(18) Numeric pain scales have been shown to be reliable and valid.(25) In addition, the DCMI (minimally clinically important difference) has been reported to be 2 points.(26)

    Time frame: It will be measured at Baseline, up to 15 min after the first session, at 4 weeks and at 4 weeks after the end of the treatment

Secondary outcomes

  1. Pressure pain threshold (PPT)

    The pressure pain threshold (PPT), defined as the minimum pressure to induce a change from a pressure sensation to a pain sensation.(27) The score is obtained from the average of 3 repeated measurements, with a 30 second rest between each one, a method that has demonstrated validity and high reliability with ICC=0.91 (95% CI: 0.82, 0.97).(19, 28) The PPT will be evaluated with an Algometer (Wagner Instruments FPX 50). The pressure (force divided by the surface area) will be applied at a speed of approximately 1kg/cm2/s. It will be measured on the most sensitive point of the lower surface of the calcaneus, posterior surface of the calcaneus, soleus muscle and internal and lateral gastrocnemius muscle.(13, 29) To measure each of these points, the subject must be placed face down on the stretcher, with the extremity to be evaluated uncovered.

    Time frame: It will be measured at Baseline, up to 15 min after the first session, at 4 weeks and at 4 weeks after the end of the treatment

  2. Calf muscle stiffness (Silfverskiöl test)

    Gastrocnemius stiffness or tightness will be assessed with the Silfverskiöld test.(20)The measurement explores the degree of passive dorsiflexion of the ankle in the supine position (with a goniometer), in two positions: with the knee extended and flexed (90°), where the hindfoot is in a neutral or varus position. A moderate force load is applied under the forefoot (it is recommended to apply the goniometric measurement with a force between 1.7 and 2kg),(30) the expected difference for the test to be positive is a minimum of 13 degrees of difference.(20) The reliability at the intra-evaluator level with ICC (95% CI) that fluctuates between 0.845 to 0.924.(31) A digital goniometer will be used (brand: baseline evaluation instruments; model: 12-1027; company: enterprises; Country: USA).

    Time frame: It will be measured at Baseline, up to 15 min after the first session, at 4 weeks and at 4 weeks after the end of the treatment

  3. Functionality (Foot Function Index (FFI))

    Functionality will be assessed through the Foot Function Index (FFI), recommended for subjects who suffer from heel pain,(5) and validated in Spanish.(21) It is a self-administered index consisting of 23 items that measure pain, disability and activity restriction, which has been shown to be reliable, valid and sensitive to foot alterations.(34-36)

    Time frame: It will be measured at Baseline, up to 15 min after the first session, at 4 weeks and at 4 weeks after the end of the treatment

  4. Health-related quality of life (SF-12)

    Health-related quality of life will be assessed with the SF-12 health questionnaire, which is a shortened version of the SF-36. This scale has 12 items with Likert-style response opinions (3 to 6 points) and a dichotomous scale, it has two summary components, physical (PCS) and mental (MCS), and it summarizes 8 dimensions: physical function, physical role, bodily pain, general health, vitality, social function, emotional role and mental health. The maximum score of the survey indicates good quality of life and is valid in Spanish (correlation with back pain PCS-12 (r= -0.405, P\<0.001) and MCS-12 (r=-0.326, P=0.0001)) and reliable (Cronbach's alpha coefficient PCS-12 was 0.77 and MCS-12 was 0.8), in patients with musculoskeletal pain.

    Time frame: It will be measured at Baseline, at 4 weeks and at 4 weeks after the end of the treatment

  5. Perception of change (Patient Global Impression of Change)

    Satisfaction after the intervention is measured through the perception of change after the intervention, applying the scale "Patient Global Impression of Change" (PGIC). The results will reflect the patient's belief about the effect of the applied treatment. (22) The scale consists of a 7-point verbal scale, with the options "I have improved a lot", "I have improved quite a bit", "I have improved a little", "I am the same", "I have worsened a little", "I have worsened quite a bit" and "I have worsened a lot". (37, 38) A clinically significant improvement is considered to be achieved when the items "I have improved a lot", "I have improved quite a bit" are scored. The test-retest reliability of the global rating of the change scales is excellent (ICC=0.90). (39)

    Time frame: It will be measured at at 4 weeks and at 4 weeks after the end of the treatment

  6. Foot health (Foot Health Status Questionnaire (FHSQ)

    Foot health will be measured with the "Foot Health Status Questionnaire (FHSQ)" questionnaire, this scale is validated in Spanish. (24) In addition, it has been shown to have content validity, construct validity, reliability and good responsiveness in patients with plantar fasciitis, who were users of orthopedic physiotherapy.(40)

    Time frame: It will be measured at Baseline, at 4 weeks and at 4 weeks after the end of the treatment

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Clinical Research Laboratory, Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences
    Talca, Septima Región 3460000, Chile
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Kinney AR, Eakman AM, Graham JE. Novel Effect Size Interpretation Guidelines and an Evaluation of Statistical Power in Rehabilitation Research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020 Dec;101(12):2219-2226. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2020.02.017. Epub 2020 Apr 6. PubMed 32272106 ↗
  • Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences: L. Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
  • Flight L, Julious SA. Practical guide to sample size calculations: non-inferiority and equivalence trials. Pharm Stat. 2016 Jan-Feb;15(1):80-9. doi: 10.1002/pst.1716. Epub 2015 Nov 25. PubMed 26604186 ↗
  • Martin RL, Irrgang JJ. A survey of self-reported outcome instruments for the foot and ankle. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007 Feb;37(2):72-84. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2007.2403. PubMed 17366962 ↗
  • Kamper D, Barin K, Parnianpour M, Reger S, Weed H. Preliminary investigation of the lateral postural stability of spinal cord-injured individuals subjected to dynamic perturbations. Spinal Cord. 1999 Jan;37(1):40-6. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3100747. PubMed 10025694 ↗
  • Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Wyrwich KW, Beaton D, Cleeland CS, Farrar JT, Haythornthwaite JA, Jensen MP, Kerns RD, Ader DN, Brandenburg N, Burke LB, Cella D, Chandler J, Cowan P, Dimitrova R, Dionne R, Hertz S, Jadad AR, Katz NP, Kehlet H, Kramer LD, Manning DC, McCormick C, McDermott MP, McQuay HJ, Patel S, Porter L, Quessy S, Rappaport BA, Rauschkolb C, Revicki DA, Rothman M, Schmader KE, Stacey BR, Stauffer JW, von Stein T, White RE, Witter J, Zavisic S. Interpreting the clinical importance of treatment outcomes in chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. J Pain. 2008 Feb;9(2):105-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2007.09.005. Epub 2007 Dec 11. PubMed 18055266 ↗
  • Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G. Smallest detectable and minimal clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF-36 quality of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. Arthritis Rheum. 2001 Aug;45(4):384-91. doi: 10.1002/1529-0131(200108)45:43.0.CO;2-0. PubMed 11501727 ↗
  • Budiman-Mak E, Conrad KJ, Mazza J, Stuck RM. A review of the foot function index and the foot function index - revised. J Foot Ankle Res. 2013 Feb 1;6(1):5. doi: 10.1186/1757-1146-6-5. PubMed 23369667 ↗
  • Saag KG, Saltzman CL, Brown CK, Budiman-Mak E. The Foot Function Index for measuring rheumatoid arthritis pain: evaluating side-to-side reliability. Foot Ankle Int. 1996 Aug;17(8):506-10. doi: 10.1177/107110079601700814. PubMed 8863033 ↗
  • Budiman-Mak E, Conrad KJ, Roach KE. The Foot Function Index: a measure of foot pain and disability. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44(6):561-70. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(91)90220-4. PubMed 2037861 ↗
  • Luo X, George ML, Kakouras I, Edwards CL, Pietrobon R, Richardson W, Hey L. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the short form 12-item survey (SF-12) in patients with back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003 Aug 1;28(15):1739-45. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000083169.58671.96. PubMed 12897502 ↗
  • Schmidt S, Vilagut G, Garin O, Cunillera O, Tresserras R, Brugulat P, Mompart A, Medina A, Ferrer M, Alonso J. [Reference guidelines for the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey version 2 based on the Catalan general population]. Med Clin (Barc). 2012 Dec 8;139(14):613-25. doi: 10.1016/j.medcli.2011.10.024. Epub 2012 Jan 11. Spanish. PubMed 22244683 ↗
  • DiGiovanni CW, Kuo R, Tejwani N, Price R, Hansen ST Jr, Cziernecki J, Sangeorzan BJ. Isolated gastrocnemius tightness. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002 Jun;84(6):962-70. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200206000-00010. PubMed 12063330 ↗
  • AlKhadhrawi N, Alshami A. Effects of myofascial trigger point dry cupping on pain and function in patients with plantar heel pain: A randomized controlled trial. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2019 Jul;23(3):532-538. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2019.05.016. Epub 2019 May 23. PubMed 31563366 ↗
  • Chesterton LS, Sim J, Wright CC, Foster NE. Interrater reliability of algometry in measuring pressure pain thresholds in healthy humans, using multiple raters. Clin J Pain. 2007 Nov-Dec;23(9):760-6. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e318154b6ae. PubMed 18075402 ↗
  • Vanderweeen L, Oostendorp RA, Vaes P, Duquet W. Pressure algometry in manual therapy. Man Ther. 1996 Dec;1(5):258-265. doi: 10.1054/math.1996.0276. PubMed 11440515 ↗
  • Farrar JT, Young JP Jr, LaMoreaux L, Werth JL, Poole MR. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain. 2001 Nov;94(2):149-158. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00349-9. PubMed 11690728 ↗
  • Katz J, Melzack R. Measurement of pain. Surg Clin North Am. 1999 Apr;79(2):231-52. doi: 10.1016/s0039-6109(05)70381-9. PubMed 10352653 ↗
  • Dominguez-Munoz FJ, Garcia-Gordillo MA, Diaz-Torres RA, Hernandez-Mocholi MA, Villafaina S, Collado-Mateo D, Jimenez-Fernandez C, Igual-Fraile D, Perez-Escanilla F, Martin-Gomez G, Adsuar JC, Gusi N. Foot Health Status Questionnaire (FHSQ) in Spanish People with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Preliminary Values Study. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 May 22;17(10):3643. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17103643. PubMed 32455874 ↗
  • Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996 Mar;34(3):220-33. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003. PubMed 8628042 ↗
  • Hurst H, Bolton J. Assessing the clinical significance of change scores recorded on subjective outcome measures. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2004 Jan;27(1):26-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2003.11.003. PubMed 14739871 ↗
  • Paez-Moguer J, Budiman-Mak E, Cuesta-Vargas AI. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Foot Function Index to Spanish. Foot Ankle Surg. 2014 Mar;20(1):34-9. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2013.09.005. Epub 2013 Nov 16. PubMed 24480497 ↗
  • Barouk P, Barouk LS. Clinical diagnosis of gastrocnemius tightness. Foot Ankle Clin. 2014 Dec;19(4):659-67. doi: 10.1016/j.fcl.2014.08.004. Epub 2014 Sep 26. PubMed 25456715 ↗
  • Kinser AM, Sands WA, Stone MH. Reliability and validity of a pressure algometer. J Strength Cond Res. 2009 Jan;23(1):312-4. doi: 10.1519/jsc.0b013e31818f051c. PubMed 19130648 ↗
  • Jensen MP, Turner JA, Romano JM. What is the maximum number of levels needed in pain intensity measurement? Pain. 1994 Sep;58(3):387-392. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(94)90133-3. PubMed 7838588 ↗
  • Sheldon A, Karas S. Adverse events associated with manual therapy of peripheral joints: A scoping review. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2022 Jul;31:159-163. doi: 10.1016/j.jbmt.2022.04.012. Epub 2022 Apr 20. PubMed 35710214 ↗
  • Tu P. Heel Pain: Diagnosis and Management. Am Fam Physician. 2018 Jan 15;97(2):86-93. PubMed 29365222 ↗
  • McClinton SM, Cleland JA, Flynn TW. Predictors of response to physical therapy intervention for plantar heel pain. Foot Ankle Int. 2015 Apr;36(4):408-16. doi: 10.1177/1071100714558508. Epub 2014 Nov 3. PubMed 25367253 ↗
  • Shashua A, Flechter S, Avidan L, Ofir D, Melayev A, Kalichman L. The effect of additional ankle and midfoot mobilizations on plantar fasciitis: a randomized controlled trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2015 Apr;45(4):265-72. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2015.5155. Epub 2015 Mar 4. PubMed 25739844 ↗
  • Jones B, Jarvis P, Lewis JA, Ebbutt AF. Trials to assess equivalence: the importance of rigorous methods. BMJ. 1996 Jul 6;313(7048):36-9. doi: 10.1136/bmj.313.7048.36. PubMed 8664772 ↗
  • Fuentes C J, Armijo-Olivo S, Magee DJ, Gross DP. A preliminary investigation into the effects of active interferential current therapy and placebo on pressure pain sensitivity: a random crossover placebo controlled study. Physiotherapy. 2011 Dec;97(4):291-301. doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2011.01.001. Epub 2011 Feb 5. PubMed 22051585 ↗
  • Ajimsha MS, Binsu D, Chithra S. Effectiveness of myofascial release in the management of plantar heel pain: a randomized controlled trial. Foot (Edinb). 2014 Jun;24(2):66-71. doi: 10.1016/j.foot.2014.03.005. Epub 2014 Mar 21. PubMed 24703512 ↗
  • Saban B, Deutscher D, Ziv T. Deep massage to posterior calf muscles in combination with neural mobilization exercises as a treatment for heel pain: a pilot randomized clinical trial. Man Ther. 2014 Apr;19(2):102-8. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2013.08.001. Epub 2013 Sep 3. PubMed 24090993 ↗
  • Mischke JJ, Jayaseelan DJ, Sault JD, Emerson Kavchak AJ. The symptomatic and functional effects of manual physical therapy on plantar heel pain: a systematic review. J Man Manip Ther. 2017 Feb;25(1):3-10. doi: 10.1080/10669817.2015.1106818. Epub 2016 Apr 26. PubMed 28855787 ↗
  • Fraser JJ, Corbett R, Donner C, Hertel J. Does manual therapy improve pain and function in patients with plantar fasciitis? A systematic review. J Man Manip Ther. 2018 May;26(2):55-65. doi: 10.1080/10669817.2017.1322736. Epub 2017 May 3. PubMed 29686479 ↗
  • McKenney K, Elder AS, Elder C, Hutchins A. Myofascial release as a treatment for orthopaedic conditions: a systematic review. J Athl Train. 2013 Jul-Aug;48(4):522-7. doi: 10.4085/1062-6050-48.3.17. Epub 2013 Apr 3. PubMed 23725488 ↗
  • Martin RL, Davenport TE, Reischl SF, McPoil TG, Matheson JW, Wukich DK, McDonough CM; American Physical Therapy Association. Heel pain-plantar fasciitis: revision 2014. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Nov;44(11):A1-33. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2014.0303. PubMed 25361863 ↗
  • Rhim HC, Kwon J, Park J, Borg-Stein J, Tenforde AS. A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews on the Epidemiology, Evaluation, and Treatment of Plantar Fasciitis. Life (Basel). 2021 Nov 24;11(12):1287. doi: 10.3390/life11121287. PubMed 34947818 ↗
  • Thomas MJ, Whittle R, Menz HB, Rathod-Mistry T, Marshall M, Roddy E. Plantar heel pain in middle-aged and older adults: population prevalence, associations with health status and lifestyle factors, and frequency of healthcare use. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019 Jul 20;20(1):337. doi: 10.1186/s12891-019-2718-6. PubMed 31325954 ↗
  • Hill CL, Gill TK, Menz HB, Taylor AW. Prevalence and correlates of foot pain in a population-based study: the North West Adelaide health study. J Foot Ankle Res. 2008 Jul 28;1(1):2. doi: 10.1186/1757-1146-1-2. PubMed 18822153 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — The demographic characteristics and the data regarding the main variable and the secondary variables of the participants will be shared.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan, Informed consent form, Clinical study report

Time frame: Data will be available indefinitely from the moment the results are published.

Access criteria: Data will be available upon request to the principal investigator or the corresponding author of related publications

09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Jan 2025 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Dec 2026, 22 months after the start.

Of 104 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Fasciitis, Plantar, half reached primary completion within 11 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 6 and three quarters within 21. This study's planned 22 months is above that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 109 studies reached it within 11 months; a quarter within 6 and three quarters within 22.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Nov 15, 2024
First posted
Jan 1, 2025
StartActual
Jan 31, 2025
Primary completionEst.
Dec 1, 2026
CompletionEst.
Jan 31, 2027
Last update
Mar 27, 2025
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Mar 27, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06754982
Lead sponsor
Universidad Católica del Maule
Responsible party
Ignacio Gajardo Valenzuela (Principal Investigator, Universidad Católica del Maule) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jan 1, 2025
Start date
Jan 31, 2025
Primary completion
Dec 1, 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Jan 31, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Mar 27, 2025

Study contacts

Ignacio Andrés Gajardo Valenzuela, Magíster
Contact
igajardovalen@gmail.com
+56993263470

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion