Chronic Plantar Fasciitis Clinical Trial
Official title:
Double-blind, Placebo-controlled, Randomised, Multicentre Study on the Efficacy and Safety of a Single Injection of Botulinum Toxin A (200 Units Dysport®) in the Treatment of Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
Verified date | November 2019 |
Source | Ipsen |
Contact | n/a |
Is FDA regulated | No |
Health authority | |
Study type | Interventional |
This study will investigate the hypothesis that the analgesic effect of a single injection of Dysport (200 MU) induces a significant reduction of symptoms in chronic cases of plantar fasciitis.
Status | Completed |
Enrollment | 40 |
Est. completion date | April 2009 |
Est. primary completion date | January 2009 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | All |
Age group | 18 Years and older |
Eligibility |
Inclusion Criteria: - Chronic plantar fasciitis (duration of disorder at least 4 months) - At least 4 points on the visual analogue scale (0-10) for the most severe pain within the last 48 hours - At least 2 previous unsuccessful conservative therapies - Age 18 and older Exclusion Criteria: - Rheumatoid diseases (M. Bechterew, chronic polyarthritis, psoriasis-arthritis, para /post-infectious arthritis etc.) - Previous surgery in the affected area of the foot - Pre-treatment with Botulinum toxin A (only de novo patients) - Prohibited concomitant treatment: local injections during the study and 2 weeks prior to start of study |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
Germany | Orthopedic Practice Biberburg | Berlin | |
Germany | University Hospital Charite, Campus Virchow, Musculoskeletal Centre, Orthopedic Clinic | Berlin | |
Germany | Orthopedic Practice | Karlsruhe | |
Germany | Klinik für Orthopädie und Rheumatologie, Universitätsklinikum Gießen und Marburg GmbH | Marburg | |
Germany | Orthocentre Munich | Munich | |
Germany | Orthopedic Practice | Weiden |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
Ipsen |
Germany,
Peterlein CD, Funk JF, Hölscher A, Schuh A, Placzek R. Is botulinum toxin A effective for the treatment of plantar fasciitis? Clin J Pain. 2012 Jul;28(6):527-33. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e31823ae65a. — View Citation
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Primary | Responders Rate at Week 6 (Pain While Moving) | The responder rate was defined as the percentage of patients whose pain score while moving during the last 48 hours, measured by means of a 10 cm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS, 0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain) decreased by at least 50% at Week 6 as compared to baseline. Pain at movement is the cardinal symptom of plantar fasciitis and the 10 cm VAS is a reference method for the assessment of pain intensity. | Baseline and Week 6 | |
Secondary | Changes From Baseline in Gerbershagen's Score at Week 18 | The Gerbershagen scale gives a global score ranging between I and III, with lower scores reflecting less impact of pain in terms of temporal, spatial aspects, drug taking behaviour and utilization of the health care system. The changes in Gerbershagen's global scores from baseline to Week 18 are reported as percentage of patients for each of the specified categories. | Baseline and Week 18 | |
Secondary | Changes From Baseline in Maximum Pain (Pain While Moving) at Each Visit | Assessments of the pain intensity while moving (maximum pain during the previous 48 hours) were performed by means of a 10 cm VAS (0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain) at each visit. The changes from baseline, expressed as Pain Intensity Difference (PID) values at each indicated timepoint are reported. | Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 | |
Secondary | Assessment of Sum of Pain Intensity Difference (SPID) for Maximum Pain for Overall Study | Assessments of the pain intensity while moving (maximum pain during the previous 48 hours) were performed by means of a 10 cm VAS (0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain) at each visit. The PID values at each timepoint were determined by comparison to baseline, followed by calculation of the area under the curve (AUC) of PID as a function of time (i.e. SPID). The least square (LS) means of SPID, adjusted for the baseline value of pain while moving are reported. | Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 | |
Secondary | Changes From Baseline in Continuous Pain (Pain At Rest) at Each Visit | Assessments of the pain intensity while at rest (continuous pain during the previous 48 hours) were performed by means of a 10 cm VAS (0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain) at each visit. The changes from baseline, expressed as PID values at each indicated timepoint are reported. | Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 | |
Secondary | Assessment of SPID for Continuous Pain for Overall Study | Assessments of the pain intensity while at rest (continuous pain during the previous 48 hours) were performed by means of a 10 cm VAS (0 = no pain, 10 = maximum pain) at each visit. The PID values at each timepoint were determined by comparison to baseline, followed by calculation of the AUC of PID as a function of time (i.e. SPID). The LS means for SPID, adjusted for the baseline value of pain at rest are reported. | Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 | |
Secondary | Changes From Baseline in Pain Threshold at Each Visit | The maximum pain felt in the medial back foot was measured using an algometer. The pain threshold corresponded to the maximum pressure at which pain was still tolerated. Changes from baseline, expressed as pain threshold differences at each indicated timepoint are reported. | Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 | |
Secondary | Assessment of Sum of Pain Threshold Differences (by Measurement of AUC) for Overall Study | Assessments of the pain threshold using an algometer (which was the pressure corresponding to the maximum tolerated pain) were performed at each visit. Pain threshold differences at each timepoint were determined by comparison to baseline, followed by calculation of the AUC of the pain threshold difference as a function of time. The LS means of AUC, adjusted for the baseline value of pain threshold are reported. | Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 | |
Secondary | Changes From Baseline in Pressure Threshold (With Algometer) at Each Visit | Pressure pain in the medial back foot was measured using an algometer. Pressure threshold corresponded to the minimum pressure causing pain. The changes from baseline, expressed as pressure threshold differences at each indicated timepoint are reported. | Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 | |
Secondary | Assessment of Sum of Pressure Threshold Differences (by Measurement of AUC) for Overall Study | Assessments of the pressure threshold using an algometer (which corresponded to the minimum pressure causing pain) were performed at each visit. Pressure threshold differences at each timepoint were determined by comparison to baseline, followed by calculation of the AUC of the pressure threshold difference as a function of time. The LS means of AUC, adjusted for the baseline value of pressure threshold are reported. | Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 | |
Secondary | Assessment of Dorsal Extension / Plantar Flexion Range of Motion (ROM) of the Affected Foot At Week 18 | Dorsal extension and plantar flexion of the affected foot were assessed at baseline and at Week 18. A ROM of approximately 70 degrees is considered to be normal. The LS means, adjusted for the baseline value are reported. | Baseline and Week 18 | |
Secondary | Number of Patients Without Pain and/or With a Pain Reduction Based on Global Assessment of Pain by Investigator at Each Visit | A global assessment of the patient's current condition relative to baseline was performed by the Investigator at each visit using 5 level scale: significantly better, slightly better, unchanged, slightly worse, significantly worse. The number of patients for each variable at each indicated timepoint are reported. | Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 | |
Secondary | Number of Patients Without Pain and/or With a Pain Reduction Based on Global Assessment of Pain by Patient at Each Visit | A global assessment of the patient's current condition relative to baseline was performed by the patient at each visit using a 5 level scale: significantly better, slightly better, unchanged, slightly worse, significantly worse. The number of patients for each variable at each indicated timepoint are reported. | Baseline and Weeks 2, 6, 10, 14 and 18 |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Recruiting |
NCT01614223 -
Autologous Conditioned Plasma (ACP) for Patients With Plantar Fasciitis
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT01981226 -
Sonoelastographic Changes After Low Energy Extracorporeal Shock Wave Therapy (ESWT) in Plantar Fasciitis
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT03255655 -
Intense Therapeutic Ultrasound - Treatment for Chronic Plantar Fascia Musculoskeletal Pain Reduction
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT06348017 -
Frequency of Neuropathic Pain in Patients With Plantar Fasciitis
|
||
Recruiting |
NCT05868577 -
Infracalcaneal Peppering Injection Technique for Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
|
Phase 1 | |
Recruiting |
NCT03938896 -
PRP IN Planter Fascitis
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05032300 -
Shear Wave Elastography Technology to Evaluate the Efficacy of ESW in the Treatment of Patients With Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT05754697 -
IASTM Versus PRT in Patients With Chronic PF
|
N/A | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT05162144 -
Proximal Medial Gastriocnemius Recession for Chronic Plantar Fasciitis
|
N/A |