Physiotherapy Department, School of Primary and Allied Health Care, Faculty of Medicine Nursing and Health Science, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia.
Discipline of Podiatry, School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
J Foot Ankle Res. 2024 Jun;17(2):e12031. doi: 10.1002/jfa2.12031.
The objective of this systematic review is to determine the benefits and harms of heel lifts to any comparator for lower limb musculoskeletal conditions.
Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid AMED, Ovid EMCARE, CINAHL Plus and SPORTDiscus were searched from inception to the end of May 2024. Randomised, quasi-randomised or non-randomised trials comparing heel lifts to any other intervention or no-treatment were eligible for inclusion. Data was extracted for the outcomes of pain, disability/function, participation, participant rating of overall condition, quality of life, composite measures and adverse events. Two authors independently assessed risk of bias and certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach at the primary time point 12 weeks (or next closest).
Eight trials (n = 903), investigating mid-portion Achilles tendinopathy, calcaneal apophysitis and plantar heel pain were included. Heel lifts were compared to exercise, ultrasound, cryotherapy orthotics, stretching, footwear, activity modification, felt pads and analgesic medication. No outcome was at low risk of bias and few effects (2 out of 47) were clinically important. Low-certainty evidence (1 trial, n = 199) indicates improved pain relief (55.7 points [95% CI: 50.3-61.1], on a 100 mm visual analogue scale) with custom orthotics compared to heel lifts at 12 weeks for calcaneal apophysitis. Very low-certainty evidence (1 trial, n = 62) indicates improved pain and function with heel lifts over indomethacin (35.5 points [95% CI: 21.1-49.9], Foot Function Index) at 12 months for plantar heel pain.
Few trials have assessed the benefits and harms of heel lifts for lower limb musculoskeletal conditions. Only two outcomes out of 47 showed clinically meaningful between group differences. However, due to very low to low certainty evidence we are unable to be confident in the results and the true effect may be substantially different.
PROSPERO registration number CRD42022309644.
本系统评价的目的是确定脚跟升高对下肢肌肉骨骼疾病的任何对照的益处和危害。
从 Ovid MEDLINE、Ovid AMED、Ovid EMCARE、CINAHL Plus 和 SPORTDiscus 中检索了从创建到 2024 年 5 月底的文献。纳入了比较脚跟升高与任何其他干预措施或无治疗的随机、半随机或非随机试验。提取疼痛、残疾/功能、参与、参与者整体状况评分、生活质量、综合措施和不良事件的结局数据。两名作者使用 GRADE 方法在主要时间点 12 周(或最近的时间点)独立评估偏倚风险和证据确定性。
纳入了 8 项试验(n=903),研究对象为中段跟腱病、跟骨骨骺炎和足底足跟痛。脚跟升高与运动、超声、冷冻疗法矫形器、伸展、鞋类、活动改变、毛毡垫和镇痛药进行了比较。没有结局的偏倚风险低,少数效果(47 个中的 2 个)具有临床意义。低确定性证据(1 项试验,n=199)表明,在 12 周时,与脚跟升高相比,定制矫形器可更有效地缓解跟骨骨骺炎的疼痛(55.7 分[95%CI:50.3-61.1],在 100mm 视觉模拟量表上)。极低确定性证据(1 项试验,n=62)表明,在 12 个月时,与吲哚美辛相比,脚跟升高可更有效地改善足底足跟痛的疼痛和功能(35.5 分[95%CI:21.1-49.9],足功能指数)。
很少有试验评估脚跟升高对下肢肌肉骨骼疾病的益处和危害。47 个结局中只有 2 个显示出有临床意义的组间差异。然而,由于极低到低确定性证据,我们无法对结果有信心,实际效果可能有很大差异。
PROSPERO 注册号 CRD42022309644。