Search

Conservative treatments for plantar fasciitis have different levels of effectiveness, so it is necessary to personalize the therapeutic modality that improves the patients' symptoms., Methods: A double-blinded randomized clinical trial was designed to evaluate the short-term efficacy of a physical treatment in chronic plantar fasciitis, namely iontophoresis, compared with radial shockwave therapy. Heel pain, health status using the EuroQol-5D questionnaire, and fascia thickness measured with ultrasound were evaluated. In total, 127 patients were randomly selected for group A and treated with iontophoresis therapy (lidocaine 0.4% and dexamethasone 0.5%), or for group B, in which they were treated with radial shockwave therapy (EWST). Measurements were taken at baseline and at follow-up during the 5 weeks of the study., Results: Statistically significant differences were observed to the shockwave therapy group in respect to the final fascia thickness, and the VAS scale ( p = 0.001). The differences between groups A and B showed that the shockwave group follow-up after 3 weeks experienced complete pain remission (1.0 ± 0.9; 95%CI 0.8-1.2) and after the 6-week follow-up, complete pain remission of plantar fasciitis was observed for both therapies. Patients had a better perception of the use of EWST at the end of the treatment, although in both groups it was satisfactory ( p = 0.001)., Conclusions: The results of this study showed a shorter-term effectiveness of shockwave treatment compared with the use of iontophoresis. However, both techniques were effective in satisfactorily reducing pain in this short period.

Epidermolysis bullosa (EB) is the overarching term for a set of rare inherited skin fragility disorders that result from mutations in at least 20 different genes. Currently, there is no cure for any of the EB subtypes associated with various mutations. Existing therapies primarily focus on alleviating pain and promoting early wound healing to prevent potential complications. Consequently, there is an urgent need for innovative therapeutic approaches. The objective of this research was to assess the efficacy of various topical treatments in patients with EB with the goal of achieving wound healing. A secondary objective was to analyse the efficacy of topical treatments for symptom reduction. A literature search was conducted using scientific databases, including The Cochrane Library, Medline (Pubmed), Web of Science, CINHAL, Embase, and Scopus. The protocol review was registered in PROSPERO (ID: 418790), and inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, resulting in the selection of 23 articles. Enhanced healing times were observed compared with the control group. No conclusive data have been observed on pain management, infection, pruritus episodes, and cure rates over time. Additionally, evidence indicates significant progress in gene therapies (B-VEC), as well as cell and protein therapies. The dressing group, Oleogel S-10, allantoin and diacerein 1%, were the most represented, followed by fibroblast utilisation. In addition, emerging treatments that improve the patient's innate immunity, such as calcipotriol, are gaining attention. However, more trials are needed to reduce the prevalence of blistering and improve the quality of life of individuals with epidermolysis bullosa.

(1) Background: Coronavirus disease, also called COVID-19, is a worldwide pandemic with a major impact on all aspects of the individual (health status, psychological, and economic aspects, among others). The perception of health professionals in this situation has been influenced by their economic and psychosocial situations. On the economic level, self-employed workers have no state subsidies, with the added disadvantage of not having sufficient means to cope with contagion. This could potentially have an impact on their health and indirectly on their family members, creating additional stress. The aim of this study was to determine whether there are differences in the level of anxiety of health professionals working in private practice compared to healthcare workers working in public institutions during the first three waves of COVID-19. (2) Methods: A cohort study on 517 subjects comparing anxiety between a group of health workers and a group of health professionals working in the public sector at three key moments during the pandemic was performed. (3) Results: Statistically significant differences were found between self-employed private health professionals compared to those working as public health workers. The perception of impact was worse in the self-employed; however, a higher level of anxiety was evident in public employees in all assessed domains (cognitive, physiological, and motor, p = 0.001). (4) Conclusions: There were significant changes when comparing the first phase between both groups; employed public healthcare workers manifested a sense of lower risk of COVID-19 contagion than privately employed professionals, who had a higher level of anxiety. In the second and third waves, negative feelings improved for both groups, and the fear of showing anxiety to the patient decreased over the course of the waves.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is caused by SARS-CoV-2 and represents the causative agent of a potentially fatal disease that is of great global public health concern. COVID-19 is a respiratory disease produced by the coronavirus family. The World Health Organization declared the disease a pandemic on 11 March 2020. Podiatrists are in a peculiar situation regarding the COVID-19 pandemic: that of a health professional aspect and the singularity that most of them practise as self-employed workers. The aim of the study is to evaluate in a group of podiatrists, working at a national level, their knowledge, perception and degree of anxiety related to the COVID-19 pandemic via the use of a questionnaire specifically developed to this end in the initial phase of the pandemic. We employed a transversal descriptive study with 302 participants, with a purposive sampling technique. The degree of perception and knowledge of the podiatrists about COVID-19 was analysed as well as the cognitive impact of the situation of confinement. The results showed that the podiatrists perceive this situation as serious at the economic and health level, that they have a thorough knowledge of the disease and that they are in a moderate to severe percentile of anxiety. Additionally, 76.2% cancelled their usual work. The COVID-19 pandemic is negatively perceived by this group of podiatrists at the personal, professional, health and economic level, with even a state of anxiety being produced.