Pressure pain threshold (PPT) is a useful tool for evaluating mechanical sensitivity in patients suffering from various musculoskeletal disorders. However, no previous study has investigated PPT in the heel of patients experiencing plantar heel pain syndrome (PHPS). The aim of this study was to compare PPT levels and topographic presentation of sensitivity in the heel of patients with PHPS and in healthy controls.
Methods:
The reliability of PPT testing in patients with PHPS was assessed for intra- and interrater recordings. The PPT levels of 40 feet in each group were then assessed on 5 predetermined sites in the heel using a standardized measurement protocol. Patient functional status (FS) as measured by the Foot & Ankle Computerized Adaptive Test was employed as an external reference.
Results:
Multivariate analysis of covariance revealed no group differences for PPTs at all sites (P = .406). Age (P = .099) or BMI (P = .510) did not affect PPT values, although there was an effect on gender (P = .006). The analysis revealed significant differences between sites (P < .001) demonstrating a diverse topographic distribution. In the PHPS group, PPT levels at the anterior/medial, posterior/medial and central sites were significantly lower than at the posterior/lateral and anterior/lateral sites (P < .05). For the control group, PPT levels at the anterior/medial site were significantly lower than all other sites (P < .001).
Conclusion:
No significant differences were found between PPT of the PHPS patients and controls, therefore, PPT cannot be recommended as an assessment tool for these patients. The topographic distribution indicated low PPT levels at the anterior/medial area of the heel in patients with PHPS and controls.
AlshamiAMSouvlisTCoppietersMW.A review of plantar heel pain of neural origin: differential diagnosis and management. Man Ther. 2008;13(2):103-111.
2.
Arendt-NielsenLNieHLaursenMB. Sensitization in patients with painful knee osteoarthritis. Pain. 2010;149(3):573-581.
3.
AttingerCCooperPBlumeP.Vascular anatomy of the foot and ankle. Oper Tech Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997;4(4):183-198.
4.
BinkleyJMStratfordPWLottSARiddleDL; The North American Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Research Network. The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS): scale development, measurement properties, and clinical application. Phys Ther. 1999;79(4):371-383.
5.
ChestertonLSSimJWrightCCFosterNE.Interrater reliability of algometry in measuring pressure pain thresholds in healthy humans, using multiple raters. Clin J Pain. 2007;23(9):760-766.
CronbachL.Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951;16:297-334.
8.
DebbiEMWolfAGoryachevY. In-shoe center of pressure: indirect force plate vs. direct insole measurement. Foot (Edinb). 2012;22(4):269-275.
9.
DeutscherDHornSDDicksteinR. Associations between treatment processes, patient characteristics, and outcomes in outpatient physical therapy practice. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90(8):1349-1363.
10.
FingletonCPDempseyLSmartKDoodyCM.Intraexaminer and interexaminer reliability of manual palpation and pressure algometry of the lower limb nerves in asymptomatic subjects. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2014;37(2):97-104.
11.
FischerAA.Pressure algometry over normal muscles. Standard values, validity and reproducibility of pressure threshold. Pain. 1987;30(1):115-126.
12.
GeberCKleinTAzadS. Test-retest and interobserver reliability of quantitative sensory testing according to the protocol of the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain (DFNS): a multi-centre study. Pain. 2011;152(3):548-556.
13.
Gómez-PerrettaCTriñanesYGonzález-VillarAJCarrillo-de-la-PeñaMT.Evaluation of the accuracy of several symptoms and domains in distinguishing patients diagnosed with fibromyalgia from healthy controls. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2016 [Epub ahead of print].
14.
GreeneDLThompsonMCGesinkDSGravesSC.Anatomic study of the medial neurovascular structures in relation to calcaneal osteotomy. Foot Ankle Int. 2001;22(7):569-571.
15.
HartDLWangY-CStratfordPWMioduskiJE.Computerized adaptive test for patients with foot or ankle impairments produced valid and responsive measures of function. Qual Life Res. 2008;17(8):1081-1091.
16.
HodgeMCNathanDBachTM.Plantar pressure pain thresholds and touch sensitivity in rheumatoid arthritis. Foot Ankle Int. 2009;30(1):1-9.
17.
IrvingDBCookJLMenzHB.Factors associated with chronic plantar heel pain: a systematic review. J Sci Med Sport. 2006;9(1-2):11-22; discussion 23-24.
18.
IrvingDBCookJLYoungMAMenzHB.Obesity and pronated foot type may increase the risk of chronic plantar heel pain: a matched case-control study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007;8:41.
19.
JengCMichelsonJMizelM.Sensory thresholds of normal human feet. Foot Ankle Int. 2000;21(6):501-504.
20.
KellyAJWainwrightAMWinsonIG.Plantar pressures are normal in plantar fasciitis. Foot Dis. 1995;11(2):129-132.
21.
KottnerJAudigeLBrorsonS. Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed. J Clin Epidemiol2011;64:96-106.
22.
KramerMSFeinsteinAR.Clinical biostatistics. LIV. The biostatistics of concordance. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1981;29(1):111-123.
23.
KuniBWangHRickertMEwerbeckVSchiltenwolfM.Pain threshold correlates with functional scores in osteoarthritis patients. Acta Orthop. 2014;86(1):1-5.
24.
LiddleDRomeKHoweT.Vertical ground reaction forces in patients with unilateral plantar heel pain—a pilot study. Gait Posture. 2000;11(1):62-66.
25.
MaquetDCroisierJ-LDemoulinCCrielaardJ-M.Pressure pain thresholds of tender point sites in patients with fibromyalgia and in healthy controls. Eur J Pain. 2004;8(2):111-117.
McClintonSMClelandJAFlynnTW.Predictors of response to physical therapy intervention for plantar heel pain. Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36(4):408-416.
28.
McPoilTGCornwallMW.Plantar tactile sensory thresholds in healthy men and women. Foot. 2006;16(4):192-197.
29.
McPoilTGMartinRLCornwallMWWukichDKIrrgangJJGodgesJJ.Heel pain–plantar fasciitis: clinical practice guidelines linked to the international classification of function, disability, and health from the orthopaedic section of the American Physical Therapy Association. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;38(4):A1-A18.
30.
MyburghCLarsenAHHartvigsenJ.A systematic, critical review of manual palpation for identifying myofascial trigger points: evidence and clinical significance. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89(6):1169-1176.
31.
NieHArendt-NielsenLAndersenHGraven-NielsenT.Temporal summation of pain evoked by mechanical stimulation in deep and superficial tissue. J Pain. 2005;6(6):348-355.
32.
NussbaumELDownesL.Reliability of clinical pressure-pain algometric measurements obtained on consecutive days. Phys Ther. 1998;78(2):160-169.
33.
PerssonABrogårdhCSjölundB.Tender or not tender: test-retest repeatability of pressure pain thresholds in the trapezius and deltoid muscles of healthy women. J Rehabil Med. 2004;36(1):17-27.
34.
PlinsingaMLBrinkMSVicenzinoBvan WilgenP. Evidence of nervous system sensitization in commonly presenting and persistent painful tendinopathies: a systematic review. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2015:1-34.
35.
PrichasukS.The heel pad in plantar heel pain. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1994;76(1):140-142.
36.
PrushanskyTDvirZDefrin-AssaR.Reproducibility indices applied to cervical pressure pain threshold measurements in healthy subjects. Clin J Pain. 2004;20(5):341-347.
37.
ReevesJLJaegerBGraff-RadfordSB.Reliability of the pressure algometer as a measure of myofascial trigger point sensitivity. Pain. 1986;24(3):313-321.
38.
RibeiroAPTrombini-SouzaFTessuttiVDLimaFRJoãoSMASaccoICN. The effects of plantar fasciitis and pain on plantar pressure distribution of recreational runners. Clin Biomech. (Bristol, Avon)2011;26(2):194-199.
39.
RibeiroILCamargoPRAlburquerque-SendínFMadeleinePFernández-de-Las-PeñasCSalviniTF.Topographical pressure pain sensitivity maps of the shoulder region in individuals with subacromial pain syndrome. Man Ther. 2016;21:134-143.
40.
RiddleDLPulisicMPidcoePJohnsonRE.Risk factors for plantar fasciitis: a matched case-control study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A(5):872-877.
41.
RiddleDLSchappertSM.Volume of ambulatory care visits and patterns of care for patients diagnosed with plantar fasciitis: a national study of medical doctors. Foot Ankle Int. 2004;25(5):303-310.
42.
RomeKHoweTHaslockI.Risk factors associated with the development of plantar heel pain in athletes. Foot. 2001;11(3):119-125.
43.
ShroutPEFleissJL.Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86(2):420-428.
44.
SterlingMTreleavenJEdwardsSJullG.Pressure pain thresholds of upper limb peripheral nerve trunks in asymptomatic subjects. Physiother Res Int. 2000;5(4):220-229.
45.
SullivanJBurnsJAdamsRPappasECrosbieJ.Musculoskeletal and activity-related factors associated with plantar heel pain. Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36(1):37-45.
46.
TalusanPGCataETanEWParksBGGuytonGP.Safe zone for neural structures in medial displacement calcaneal osteotomy: a cadaveric and radiographic investigation. Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36(12):1493-1498.
47.
UnlüREOrbayHKeremMEsmerAFTüccarESensözO.Innervation of three weight-bearing areas of the foot: an anatomic study and clinical implications. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2008;61(5):557-561.
48.
VanderweeënLOostendorpRABVaesPDuquetW.Pressure algometry in manual therapy. Man Ther. 1996;1(5):258-265.
49.
de VetHCWTerweeCBKnolDLBouterLM.When to use agreement versus reliability measures. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59(10):1033-1039.
50.
WalterSDEliasziwMDonnerA.Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. Stat Med. 1998;17(1):101-110.
51.
WaltonDMMacdermidJCNielsonWTeasellRWChiassonMBrownL.Reliability, standard error, and minimum detectable change of clinical pressure pain threshold testing in people with and without acute neck pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011;41(9):644-650.
52.
WangY-CHartDLStratfordPWMioduskiJE.Clinical interpretation of computerized adaptive test outcome measures in patients with foot/ankle impairments. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009;39(10):753-764.
53.
XiongSGoonetillekeRSJiangZ.Pressure thresholds of the human foot: measurement reliability and effects of stimulus characteristics. Ergonomics. 2011;54(3):282-293.
