Sacroiliac Joint DysfunctionNCT07887100
Plantar Fascia Thickness and Pedobarometric Parameters in Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction
An observational study of Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction and Plantar Fascia Thickness, run by Dokuz Eylul University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
Trial summary
This study aims to compare plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters between individuals with sacroiliak joint dysfunction and healty individuals.A total of 52 adult volunteers aged 18 to 50 years were included in the study, with 26 pariticipants in the sacroiliac joint dysfunction group and 26… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 50 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction, Plantar Fascia Thickness, Pedobarography
- How many people
- 52 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTurkey (Türkiye)
- Study dates
- 2 Mar 2026to 1 Sep 2026
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 50 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Study population: Patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction were enrolled consecutively from individuals aged 18 to 50 years who presented with low back pain to the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation outpatient clinic of Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Medicine. Healthy volunteers of the same age range were recruited as controls from the staff of Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Medicine and Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation and through announcements in these units
Who may be able to join
- Sacroiliac joint dysfunction group:
- Age 18 to 50 years
- Low back pain for at least 3 months, localized mainly around the posterior superior iliac spine, with or without radiation to the buttock or posterior thigh
- At least three of six sacroiliac joint pain provocation tests (FABER, Gaenslen, thigh thrust, sacral thrust, compression, and distraction) positive on the same side
- Foot Posture Index-6 score between 0 and +5 in both feet
- Healthy control group:
Show all 9Show fewer
- Age 18 to 50 years
- No diagnosis of sacroiliac joint dysfunction and no related complaints (all six sacroiliac joint pain provacation tests (FABER, Gaenslen, thigh thrust, sacral thrust, compression, and distraction) negative bilaterally )
- Foot Posture Index-6 score between 0 and +5 in both feet
Who cannot join
- Systemic rheumatologic disease (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis)
- Metabolic bone disease (e.g., osteoporosis, osteomalacia)
- Active lumbar disc herniation or radiculopathy
- Previous fracture, surgery, or structural deformity of the lower extremity
- Pregnancy
- Body mass index above 30 kg/m2
Show all 16Show fewer
- Diabetes mellitus and/or hypothyroidism
- Regular exercise on more than three days per week
- Occupation requiring prolonged standing (e.g., teacher, surgeon, waiter)
- Walking more than 5 km per day
- Physical therapy and/or injection treatment to the foot or ankle within the past 6 months
- Previous diagnosis or history of plantar fasciitis
- Central or peripheral nervous system disease (e.g., stroke, peripheral neuropathy, tarsal tunnel syndrome, Morton's neuroma)
- Lower extremity length discrepancy of 1 cm or more
- Use of orthopedic insoles, special footwear, or orthoses
- History of serious foot trauma (e.g., moderate to severe ankle sprain)
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Turkey (Türkiye)1 site
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Medical Faculty of Dokuz Eylül University
Izmir, 35330
About this study
Official title: Comparative Evaluation of Plantar Fascia Thickness and Pedobarometric Parameters in Patients With Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction
This study aims to compare plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters between individuals with sacroiliak joint dysfunction and healty individuals.A total of 52 adult volunteers aged 18 to 50 years were included in the study, with 26 pariticipants in the sacroiliac joint dysfunction group and 26 participants in the healty control group.Participants with sacroiliac joint dysfunction were identified based on clinical examination and sacroiliac joint pain provocation tests. Foot posture was evaluated using the Foot Posture Index-6 (FPI-6), and participants with neutral foot posture were included. Plantar fascia thickness of both feet was measured using ultrasound. Static foot pressure measurements were performed during standing with eyes open and closed, and dynamic foot pressure measurements were performed during walking using a pedobarometric system. The study compares plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters between the sacroiliak joint dysfunction and control groups. It also investigates the relationship between plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters.
Read the detailed description
This cross-sectional, comparative case-control study was designed to compare plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters between patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD) and healthy controls, and to examine the relationship between plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters in the patient group.
Patients aged 18 to 50 years who presented with low back pain to the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation outpatient clinic of Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Medicine and met the eligibility criteria were enrolled consecutively. The control group consisted of healthy volunteers without SIJD, selected to be similar to the patient group in age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). Controls were recruited from the staff of the Faculty of Medicine and the Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation and through announcements in these units. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants. The minimum sample size, calculated with G*Power 3.1.9.7 (d = 0.80, alpha = 0.05, power = 80%), was 26 participants per group (52 in total).
Age, sex, occupation, height, weight, BMI, weekly exercise duration, daily step count, comorbidities, lower limb length discrepancy, and dominant foot were recorded. All assessments were completed on the same day by the same investigator, who was not blinded to group status.
SIJD was diagnosed in patients with pain around the posterior superior iliac spine when at least three of six provocation tests (FABER, Gaenslen, thigh thrust, sacral thrust, compression, and distraction) were positive on the same side. A test was considered positive when it reproduced the patient's familiar pain, and the affected side was recorded.
Foot posture was assessed with the Foot Posture Index-6 (FPI-6), which consists of six items with a total score ranging from -12 to +12. Only participants with scores between 0 and +5 (neutral foot posture) in both feet were included.
Plantar fascia thickness was measured by ultrasonography (GE Versana Premier, 4.2-13 MHz linear probe) with the participant lying prone. Measurements were taken in the sagittal plane at the calcaneal insertion of the fascia, and the mean of three measurements was recorded for each foot. Echogenicity, calcaneal spur, perifascial fluid, and Doppler vascularity were also recorded.
Pedobarometric assessment was performed barefoot on a TekScan MatScan pressure mat. Static measurements lasted 30 seconds and were taken with eyes open and eyes closed. Dynamic measurements were taken with the three-step protocol in both walking directions, so that each foot was recorded separately. Each measurement was repeated three times and averaged. Center of force (CoF) parameters (ellipse area, path length, variability, and anteroposterior and mediolateral excursion) and load distribution (% body weight) were recorded.
Data collection has been completed, and statistical analyses will be performed with IBM SPSS Statistics version 27. Depending on the distribution of the data, continuous variables will be compared between groups with the independent-samples t test or the Mann-Whitney U test, and categorical variables with the chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Associations between plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters will be assessed with Pearson or Spearman correlation analysis.Multivariable linear regression analysis will be used to identify factors associated with plantar fascia thickness.The Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate procedure will be applied for multiple comparions where appropriate. Effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals will be reported together with p values, and p < 0.05 will be considered statistically significant.
- Conditions
- Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction, Plantar Fascia Thickness, Pedobarography, Foot Posture Index Score, Pedobarometric
- Keywords
- Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction, Plantar fascia thickness, pedobarography, Foot Posture Index Score, pedobarometric
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction Group | Patients with low back pain who were diagnosed with sacroiliac joint dysfunction when at least three of six pain provocation tests were positive on the same side. No intervention was applied. Plantar fascia thickness was measured by ultrasonography, and static and dynamic pedobarometric assessments were performed. | |
| Healthy Control Group | Healthy volunteers without sacroiliac joint dysfunction, selected to be similar to the patient group in age, sex, and body mass index. No intervention was applied. Participants underwent the same ultrasonographic and pedobarometric assessments as the patient group. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Plantar Fascia Thickness
Plantar fascia thickness was measured by ultrasonography in the sagittal plane at the calcaneal insertion of the fascia. Three measurements were taken for each foot, and their mean was recorded in millimeters.
Measured: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Center of Force Ellipse Area
Center of force (CoF) ellipse area was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in square centimeters.
Measured: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Center of Force Path Length
Center of force (CoF) path length was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.
Measured: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Center of Force Variability
Center of force (CoF) variability was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.
Measured: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Center of Force Anteroposterior Excursion
Center of Force Anteroposterior Excursion was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.
Measured: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Center of Force Mediolateral Excursion
Center of Force Mediolateral Excursion was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.
Measured: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Total Foot Load
The percentage of body weight borne by each foot was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded as a percentage of body weight.
Measured: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Forefoot Load
The percentage of body weight borne by the forefoot region of each foot was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded as a percentage of body weight.
Measured: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Rearfoot Load
The percentage of body weight borne by the rearfoot region of each foot was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded as a percentage of body weight.
Measured: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Oct 2026
- Study start2 Mar 2026
- Primary completion1 Sep 2026
- Study completion1 Sep 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Sacroiliac Joint DysfunctionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Cross-sectional
- Enrolment
- 52 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Dokuz Eylul University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Nihan ERDINC GUNDUZ, Dokuz Eylul University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07887100
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2026/02-19
- Status last verified
- Sep 2026
- First submitted
- 15 Oct 2026
- Last updated
- 21 Oct 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Individual participant data will not be shared, as the protocol approved by the ethics committee specifies that study data will not be shared with third parties.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Oct 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparative Evaluation of Plantar Fascia Thickness and Pedobarometric Parameters in Patients With Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07887100
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2026/02-19
- Conditions
- Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction, Plantar Fascia Thickness, Pedobarography, Foot Posture Index Score, Pedobarometric
- Keywords
- Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction, Plantar fascia thickness, pedobarography, Foot Posture Index Score, pedobarometric
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 52 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Dokuz Eylul UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 2 Mar 2026 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Sep 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Sep 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 21 Oct 2026 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study aims to compare plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters between individuals with sacroiliak joint dysfunction and healty individuals.A total of 52 adult volunteers aged 18 to 50 years were included in the study, with 26 pariticipants in the sacroiliac joint dysfunction group and 26 participants in the healty control group.Participants with sacroiliac joint dysfunction were identified based on clinical examination and sacroiliac joint pain provocation tests. Foot posture was evaluated using the Foot Posture Index-6 (FPI-6), and participants with neutral foot posture were included. Plantar fascia thickness of both feet was measured using ultrasound. Static foot pressure measurements were performed during standing with eyes open and closed, and dynamic foot pressure measurements were performed during walking using a pedobarometric system. The study compares plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters between the sacroiliak joint dysfunction and control groups. It also investigates the relationship between plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters.
Detailed description
This cross-sectional, comparative case-control study was designed to compare plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters between patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD) and healthy controls, and to examine the relationship between plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters in the patient group.
Patients aged 18 to 50 years who presented with low back pain to the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation outpatient clinic of Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Medicine and met the eligibility criteria were enrolled consecutively. The control group consisted of healthy volunteers without SIJD, selected to be similar to the patient group in age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). Controls were recruited from the staff of the Faculty of Medicine and the Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation and through announcements in these units. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants. The minimum sample size, calculated with G*Power 3.1.9.7 (d = 0.80, alpha = 0.05, power = 80%), was 26 participants per group (52 in total).
Age, sex, occupation, height, weight, BMI, weekly exercise duration, daily step count, comorbidities, lower limb length discrepancy, and dominant foot were recorded. All assessments were completed on the same day by the same investigator, who was not blinded to group status.
SIJD was diagnosed in patients with pain around the posterior superior iliac spine when at least three of six provocation tests (FABER, Gaenslen, thigh thrust, sacral thrust, compression, and distraction) were positive on the same side. A test was considered positive when it reproduced the patient's familiar pain, and the affected side was recorded.
Foot posture was assessed with the Foot Posture Index-6 (FPI-6), which consists of six items with a total score ranging from -12 to +12. Only participants with scores between 0 and +5 (neutral foot posture) in both feet were included.
Plantar fascia thickness was measured by ultrasonography (GE Versana Premier, 4.2-13 MHz linear probe) with the participant lying prone. Measurements were taken in the sagittal plane at the calcaneal insertion of the fascia, and the mean of three measurements was recorded for each foot. Echogenicity, calcaneal spur, perifascial fluid, and Doppler vascularity were also recorded.
Pedobarometric assessment was performed barefoot on a TekScan MatScan pressure mat. Static measurements lasted 30 seconds and were taken with eyes open and eyes closed. Dynamic measurements were taken with the three-step protocol in both walking directions, so that each foot was recorded separately. Each measurement was repeated three times and averaged. Center of force (CoF) parameters (ellipse area, path length, variability, and anteroposterior and mediolateral excursion) and load distribution (% body weight) were recorded.
Data collection has been completed, and statistical analyses will be performed with IBM SPSS Statistics version 27. Depending on the distribution of the data, continuous variables will be compared between groups with the independent-samples t test or the Mann-Whitney U test, and categorical variables with the chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Associations between plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters will be assessed with Pearson or Spearman correlation analysis.Multivariable linear regression analysis will be used to identify factors associated with plantar fascia thickness.The Benjamini-Hochberg false discovery rate procedure will be applied for multiple comparions where appropriate. Effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals will be reported together with p values, and p < 0.05 will be considered statistically significant.
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Cross-sectional
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction Group | – | –Patients with low back pain who were diagnosed with sacroiliac joint dysfunction when at least three of six pain provocation tests were positive on the same side. No intervention was applied. Plantar fascia thickness was measured by ultrasonography, and static and dynamic pedobarometric assessments were performed. |
| Healthy Control Group | – | –Healthy volunteers without sacroiliac joint dysfunction, selected to be similar to the patient group in age, sex, and body mass index. No intervention was applied. Participants underwent the same ultrasonographic and pedobarometric assessments as the patient group. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 50 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
- Study population
- Patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction were enrolled consecutively from individuals aged 18 to 50 years who presented with low back pain to the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation outpatient clinic of Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Medicine. Healthy volunteers of the same age range were recruited as controls from the staff of Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Medicine and Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation and through announcements in these units
Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Age 18 to 50 years
- Low back pain for at least 3 months, localized mainly around the posterior superior iliac spine, with or without radiation to the buttock or posterior thigh
- At least three of six sacroiliac joint pain provocation tests (FABER, Gaenslen, thigh thrust, sacral thrust, compression, and distraction) positive on the same side
- Foot Posture Index-6 score between 0 and +5 in both feet
- Age 18 to 50 years
Key exclusion criteria (16 listed)
- Systemic rheumatologic disease (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis)
- Metabolic bone disease (e.g., osteoporosis, osteomalacia)
- Active lumbar disc herniation or radiculopathy
- Previous fracture, surgery, or structural deformity of the lower extremity
- Pregnancy
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Plantar Fascia Thickness
Time frame: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Plantar fascia thickness was measured by ultrasonography in the sagittal plane at the calcaneal insertion of the fascia. Three measurements were taken for each foot, and their mean was recorded in millimeters.
Center of Force Ellipse Area
Time frame: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Center of force (CoF) ellipse area was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in square centimeters.
Center of Force Path Length
Time frame: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Center of force (CoF) path length was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.
Center of Force Variability
Time frame: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Center of force (CoF) variability was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.
Center of Force Anteroposterior Excursion
Time frame: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Center of Force Anteroposterior Excursion was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.
Center of Force Mediolateral Excursion
Time frame: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
Center of Force Mediolateral Excursion was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.
Total Foot Load
Time frame: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
The percentage of body weight borne by each foot was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded as a percentage of body weight.
Forefoot Load
Time frame: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
The percentage of body weight borne by the forefoot region of each foot was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded as a percentage of body weight.
Rearfoot Load
Time frame: At enrollment (single assessment visit)
The percentage of body weight borne by the rearfoot region of each foot was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded as a percentage of body weight.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 Oct 2026.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Individual participant data will not be shared, as the protocol approved by the ethics committee specifies that study data will not be shared with third parties.
Related trials for Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Retro Walking in Patients With Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction
Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction
RecruitingObservational study
Real World Evidence of SI-BONE's iFuse TORQ TNT Advancing Treatment of Pelvic Ring Fractures
Fracture; Pelvic, Insufficiency Fractures
Not yet recruiting
Comparison of High-Intensity and Conventional Physical Therapy in Musculoskeletal Disorders
Low Back Pain, Radicular Syndrome
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Correlation Between Trunk Muscles Endurance and Dynamic Balance in Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction
Trunk Extensor Muscle Endurance
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Post-Market Clinical Study on a Modular SI Joint Fusion System
Sacroiliitis, Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction and Plantar Fascia Thickness, run by Dokuz Eylul University at 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye).
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 9 inclusion and 16 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 Oct 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Turkey (Türkiye). Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Plantar Fascia Thickness (time frame: At enrollment (single assessment visit)). The study lists 9 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 21 Oct 2026.