Ultrasonographic examination of plantar fasciitis: a comparison of patient positions during examination

Jae Hoon Ahn, Choong Woo Lee, ChanJoo Park, Yoon-Chung Kim, Jae Hoon Ahn, Choong Woo Lee, ChanJoo Park, Yoon-Chung Kim

Abstract

Background: Musculoskeletal ultrasound is a non-invasive and low-cost modality for real-time visualisation of the plantar fascia. Ultrasound examination for plantar fasciitis is generally performed with the patient in a prone position, although the rational for using a prone position has not been validated. The aim of the study was to investigate if ultrasound examination in a supine position, which is more comfortable than the prone position, is valid.

Methods: We conducted a prospective study of 30 participants with plantar fasciitis, 8 men (27 %) and 22 women (73 %), with a mean age of 53.9 ± 12.6 (range, 32 to 77) years, and an equal distribution of left and right feet. The plantar heel was divided into three portions for ultrasound examination: medial, central and lateral. Two measurements of plantar fascia thickness were obtained for each portion, with participants in 2 positions (supine and prone) and for 2 ankle postures (neutral and 15° of plantarflexion). Mean measurements of plantar fascia thickness were compared between the two positions (Wilcoxon signed rank tests for non-normally distributed data and paired t-tests for normally distributed data). Participants were asked to report their preferred position for examination, supine or prone.

Results: The measured thickness was comparable for both supine and prone positions, for both ankle postures, neutral and 15° of plantarflexion (p > 0.05). A specific self-reported preferred position was not identified.

Conclusions: Ultrasound examination of plantar fasciitis can be performed in the supine position without any significant difference in measurement compared to examination in the conventional prone position.

Trial registration: The Catholic Medical Center Office of Human Research Protection Program (CMC-OHRP)/Institutional Review Board approved the current study (Approval No. KC12DISI0338), and all participants provided their written informed consent for participation and publication.

Keywords: Plantar fasciitis; Prone position; Supine position; Ultrasound.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
The vertical thickness of the plantar fascia was measured at a standard reference point (white arrow) where the fascia crosses the anterior most aspect of the inferior border of the calcaneus
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Comparison of measurements of plantar fascia thickness obtained in supine and in prone positions for a representative 54-year-old woman, with the ankle in a neutral posture. A thickness of 7.0 mm was obtained in the supine position (a); compared to 7.1 mm in the prone position (b)

References

    1. Sabir N, Demirlenk S, Yagci B, Karabulut N, Cubukcu S. Clinical utility of sonography in diagnosing plantar fasciitis. J Ultrasound Med. 2005;24(8):1041–1048.
    1. Furey JG. Plantar fasciitis. The painful heel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1975;57(5):672–673.
    1. Schepsis AA, Leach RE, Gorzyca J. Plantar fasciitis. Etiology, treatment, surgical results, and review of the literature. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;266:185–196.
    1. Shikoff MD, Figura MA, Postar SE. A retrospective study of 195 patients with heel pain. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1986;76(2):71–75. doi: 10.7547/87507315-76-2-71.
    1. Gibbon WW, Long G. Ultrasound of the plantar aponeurosis (fascia) Skeletal Radiol. 1999;28(1):21–26. doi: 10.1007/s002560050467.
    1. Tsai WC, Chiu MF, Wang CL, Tang FT, Wong MK. Ultrasound evaluation of plantar fasciitis. Scand J Rheumatol. 2000;29(4):255–259. doi: 10.1080/030097400750041415.
    1. Wall JR, Harkness MA, Crawford A. Ultrasound diagnosis of plantar fasciitis. Foot Ankle. 1993;14(8):465–470. doi: 10.1177/107110079301400807.
    1. McMillan AM, Landorf KB, Barrett JT, Menz HB, Bird AR. Diagnostic imaging for chronic plantar heel pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Foot Ankle Res. 2009;2:32. doi: 10.1186/1757-1146-2-32.
    1. Akfirat M, Sen C, Günes T. Ultrasonographic appearance of the plantar fasciits. Clin Imaging. 2003;27(5):353–357. doi: 10.1016/S0899-7071(02)00591-0.
    1. Scheel AK, Schmidt WA, Hermann KG, Bruyn GA, D’Agostino MA, Grassi W, et al. Interobserver reliability of rheumatologists performing musculoskeletal ultrasonography: results from a EULAR “Train the trainers” course. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64(7):1043–1049. doi: 10.1136/ard.2004.030387.
    1. Rathleff MS, Moelgaard C, Lykkegaard OJ. Intra-and interobserver reliability of quantitative ultrasound measurement of the plantar fascia. J Clin Ultrasound. 2011;39(3):128–134. doi: 10.1002/jcu.20787.
    1. Cheng JW, Tsai WC, Yu TY, Huang KY. Reproducibility of sonographic measurement of thickness and echogenicity of the plantar fascia. J Clin Ultrasound. 2012;40(1):14–19. doi: 10.1002/jcu.20903.
    1. Cardinal E, Chhem RK, Beauregard CG, Aubin B, Pelletier M. Plantar fasciitis: sonographic evaluation. Radiology. 1996;201(1):257–259. doi: 10.1148/radiology.201.1.8816554.

Source: PubMed

3
Iratkozz fel