Plantar fasciitis : are pain and fascial thickness associated with arch shape and loading?

Background and Purpose Although plantar fascial thickening is a sonographic criterion for the diagnosis of plantar fasciitis, the effect of local loading and structural factors on fascial morphology are unknown. The purposes of this study were to compare sonographic measures of fascial thickness and radiographic measures of arch shape and regional loading of the foot during gait in individuals with and without unilateral plantar fasciitis and to investigate potential relationships between these loading and structural factors and the morphology of the plantar fascia in individuals with and without heel pain. Subjects The participants were 10 subjects with unilateral plantar fasciitis and 10 matched asymptomatic controls. Methods Heel pain on weight bearing was measured by a visual analog scale. Fascial thickness and static arch angle were determined from bilateral sagittal sonograms and weight-bearing lateral foot roentgenograms. Regional plantar loading was estimated from a pressure plate. Results On average, the plantar fascia of the symptomatic limb was thicker than the plantar fascia of the asymptomatic limb (6.1±1.4 mm versus 4.2±0.5 mm), which, in turn, was thicker than the fascia of the matched control limbs (3.4±0.5 mm and 3.5±0.6 mm). Pain was correlated with fascial thickness, arch angle, and midfoot loading in the symptomatic foot. Fascial thickness, in turn, was positively correlated with arch angle in symptomatic and asymptomatic feet and with peak regional loading of the midfoot in the symptomatic limb. Discussion and Conclusion The findings indicate that fascial thickness and pain in plantar fasciitis are associated with the regional loading and static shape of the arch.

A survey of the use of grading scales for contact lens complications in optometric practice

Purpose:  The aim of this study was to investigate the extent and pattern of use of grading scales for contact lens complications (‘grading scales’) in optometric practice. Methods:  An anonymous postal survey was sent to all 756 members of the Queensland Division of Optometrists Association Australia. Information was elicited relating to level of experience, practice type and location, and mode of usage of grading scales. Results:  Survey forms were returned by 237 optometrists, representing a 31 per cent response rate. The majority of respondents (61 per cent) reported using grading scales frequently in practice, while 65 per cent of these preferred to use the Efron Grading Scales for Contact Lens Complications. Seventy-six per cent of optometrists use a method of incremental grading rather than simply grading with whole numbers. Grading scales are more likely to be used by optometrists who have recently graduated (p < 0.001), have a postgraduate certificate in ocular therapeutics (p = 0.018), see more contact lens patients (p = 0.027) and use other forms of grading scales (p < 0.001). The most frequently graded ocular conditions were corneal staining, papillary conjunctivitis and conjunctival redness. The main reasons for not using grading scales included a preference for sketches, photographs or descriptions (87 per cent) and unavailability of scales (29 per cent). Conclusion:  Grading scales for contact lens complications are used extensively in optometric practice for a variety of purposes. This tool can now be considered as an expected norm in contact lens practice. We advocate the incorporation of such grading scales into professional guidelines and standards for good optometric clinical practice.