↓ Skip to main content

Orthosis-Shaped Sandals Are as Efficacious as In-Shoe Orthoses and Better than Flat Sandals for Plantar Heel Pain: A Randomized Control Trial

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
65 news outlets
twitter
30 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
79 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Orthosis-Shaped Sandals Are as Efficacious as In-Shoe Orthoses and Better than Flat Sandals for Plantar Heel Pain: A Randomized Control Trial
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2015
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0142789
Pubmed ID
Authors

Bill Vicenzino, Thomas G. McPoil, Aoife Stephenson, Sanjoy K. Paul

Abstract

To investigate efficacy of a contoured sandal being marketed for plantar heel pain with comparison to a flat flip-flop and contoured in-shoe insert/orthosis. 150 volunteers aged 50 (SD: 12) years with plantar heel pain (>4 weeks) were enrolled after responding to advertisements and eligibility determined by telephone and at first visit. Participants were randomly allocated to receive commercially available contoured sandals (n = 49), flat flip-flops (n = 50) or over the counter, pre-fabricated full-length foot orthotics (n = 51). Primary outcomes were a 15-point Global Rating of Change scale (GROC: 1 = a very great deal worse, 15 = a very great deal better), 13 to 15 representing an improvement and the 20-item Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS) on which participants rate 20 common weight bearing activities and activities of daily living on a 5-point scale (0 = extreme difficulty, 4 = no difficulty). Secondary outcomes were worst level of heel pain in the preceding week, and the foot and ankle ability measure. Outcomes were collected blind to allocation. Analyses were done on an intention to treat basis with 12 weeks being the primary outcome time of interest. The contoured sandal was 68% more likely to report improvement in terms of GROC compared to flat flip-flop. On the LEFS the contoured sandal was 61% more likely than flat flip-flop to report improvement. The secondary outcomes in the main reflected the primary outcomes, and there were no differences between contoured sandal and shoe insert. Physicians can have confidence in supporting a patient's decision to wear contoured sandals or in-shoe orthoses as one of the first and simple strategies to manage their heel pain. The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12612000463875.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 30 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 79 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 14 18%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 8%
Student > Postgraduate 4 5%
Other 3 4%
Other 6 8%
Unknown 35 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 18 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 18%
Engineering 4 5%
Sports and Recreations 3 4%
Social Sciences 1 1%
Other 3 4%
Unknown 36 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 528. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 April 2016.
All research outputs
#38,113
of 22,835,198 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#642
of 194,874 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#534
of 390,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#14
of 4,991 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,835,198 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 194,874 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,235 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,991 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.