• 1

    Toomey EP: Plantar heel pain. Foot Ankle Clin 14: 229, 2009.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Davies MS, Weiss GA, Saxby TS: Plantar fasciitis: how successful is surgical intervention? Foot Ankle Int 20: 803, 1999.

  • 3

    Pfeffer G, Bacchetti P, Deland J, et al: Comparison of custom and prefabricated orthoses in the initial treatment of proximal plantar fasciitis. Foot Ankle Int 20: 214, 1999.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Goff JD, Crawford R: Diagnosis and treatment of plantar fasciitis. Am Fam Physician 84: 676, 2011.

  • 5

    Cardinal E, Chhem RK, Beauregard CG, et al: Plantar fasciitis: sonographic evaluation. Radiology 201: 257, 1996.

  • 6

    Tsai WC, Chiu MF, Wang CL, et al: Ultrasound evaluation of plantar fasciitis. Scand J Rheumatol 29: 255, 2000.

  • 7

    Karabay N, Toros T, Hurel C: Ultrasonographic evaluation in plantar fasciitis. J Foot Ankle Surg 46: 442, 2007.

  • 8

    McMillan AM, Landorf KB, Barrett JT, et al: Diagnostic imaging for chronic plantar heel pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Foot Ankle Res 2: 32, 2009.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Wearing SC, Smeathers JE, Yates B, et al: Sagittal movement of the medial longitudinal arch is unchanged in plantar fasciitis. Med Sci Sports Exerc 36: 1761, 2004.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    DeMaio M, Paine R, Mangine RE, et al: Plantar fasciitis. Orthopedics 16: 1153, 1993.

  • 11

    Sorrentino F, Iovane A, Vetro A, et al: Role of high-resolution ultrasound in guiding treatment of idiopathic plantar fasciitis with minimally invasive techniques. Radiol Med 113: 486, 2008.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Riddle DL, Pulisic M, Pidcoe P, et al: Risk factors for plantar fasciitis: a matched case-control study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85: 872, 2003.

  • 13

    Lemont H, Ammirati KM, Usen N: Plantar fasciitis: a degenerative process (fasciosis) without inflammation. JAPMA 93: 234, 2003.

  • 14

    Kane D, Greaney T, Bresnihan B, et al: Ultrasound guided injection of recalcitrant plantar fasciitis. Ann Rheum Dis 57: 383, 1998.

  • 15

    Kamel M, Kotob H: High frequency ultrasonographic findings in plantar fasciitis and assessment of local steroid injection. J Rheumatol 27: 2139, 2000.

  • 16

    Wearing SC, Smeathers JE, Urry SR, et al: The pathomechanics of plantar fasciitis. Sports Med 36: 585, 2006.

  • 17

    Kiritsi O, Tsitas K, Malliaropoulos N, et al: Ultrasonographic evaluation of plantar fasciitis after low-level laser therapy: results of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Lasers Med Sci 25: 275, 2010.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Uzel M, Cetinus E, Ekerbicer HC, et al: The influence of athletic activity on the plantar fascia in healthy young adults. J Clin Ultrasound 34: 17, 2006.

  • 19

    Pascual Huerta J, Alarcón García JM: Effect of gender, age and anthropometric variables on plantar fascia thickness at different locations in asymptomatic subjects. Eur J Radiol 62: 449, 2007.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Pascual Huerta J, García JM, Matamoros EC, et al: Relationship of body mass index, ankle dorsiflexion, and foot pronation on plantar fascia thickness in healthy, asymptomatic subjects. JAPMA 98: 379, 2008.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Vohra PK, Kincaid BR, Japour CJ, et al: Ultrasonographic evaluation of plantar fascia bands: a retrospective study of 211 symptomatic feet. JAPMA 92: 444, 2002.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Detection of Normal Plantar Fascia Thickness in Adults via the Ultrasonographic Method

Kadir Abul Bursa Yenisehir State Hospital, Yenişehir/Bursa, Turkey.

Search for other papers by Kadir Abul in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD
,
Devrim Ozer Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Baltalimani Bone Diseases Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Search for other papers by Devrim Ozer in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD
,
Secil Sezgin Sakizlioglu Department of Radiology, Baltalimani Bone Diseases Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Search for other papers by Secil Sezgin Sakizlioglu in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD
,
Abdul Fettah Buyuk Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Baltalimani Bone Diseases Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Search for other papers by Abdul Fettah Buyuk in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD
, and
Mehmet Akif Kaygusuz Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Baltalimani Bone Diseases Research and Training Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Search for other papers by Mehmet Akif Kaygusuz in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 MD
Restricted access

Background

Heel pain is a prevalent concern in orthopedic clinics, and there are numerous pathologic abnormalities that can cause heel pain. Plantar fasciitis is the most common cause of heel pain, and the plantar fascia thickens in this process. It has been found that thickening to greater than 4 mm in ultrasonographic measurements can be accepted as meaningful in diagnoses. Herein, we aimed to measure normal plantar fascia thickness in adults using ultrasonography.

Methods

We used ultrasonography to measure the plantar fascia thickness of 156 healthy adults in both feet between April 1, 2011, and June 30, 2011. These adults had no previous heel pain. The 156 participants comprised 88 women (56.4%) and 68 men (43.6%) (mean age, 37.9 years; range, 18–65 years). The weight, height, and body mass index of the participants were recorded, and statistical analyses were conducted.

Results

The mean ± SD (range) plantar fascia thickness measurements for subgroups of the sample were as follows: 3.284 ± 0.56 mm (2.4–5.1 mm) for male right feet, 3.3 ± 0.55 mm (2.5–5.0 mm) for male left feet, 2.842 ± 0.42 mm (1.8–4.1 mm) for female right feet, and 2.8 ± 0.44 mm (1.8–4.3 mm) for female left feet. The overall mean ± SD (range) thickness for the right foot was 3.035 ± 0.53 mm (1.8–5.1 mm) and for the left foot was 3.053 ± 0.54 mm (1.8–5.0 mm). There was a statistically significant and positive correlation between plantar fascia thickness and participant age, weight, height, and body mass index.

Conclusions

The plantar fascia thickness of adults without heel pain was measured to be less than 4 mm in most participants (~92%). There was no statistically significant difference between the thickness of the right and left foot plantar fascia.

Corresponding author: Kadir Abul, MD, Bursa Yenisehir State Hospital, Atatürk cad. no:60, Yenişehir/Bursa, 16900, Turkey. (E-mail: doktorkadir@gmail.com)