Search

Background: A lack of data exist about the effectiveness of active treatments for persistent plantar heel pain (PPHP)., Objectives: To compare short-term functional and clinical effects of a 4-week barefoot or shod treadmill walking program for people with PPHP., Methods: A single-blinded clinical trial randomized 52 participants with PPHP into either a barefoot walking group (BWG), or a shod walking group (SWG). All participants received therapeutic ultrasound. Outcomes were measured at baseline (t 0 ), following 4 weeks of treatment (t 1 ), and at 1-month follow-up (t 2 ). The SF-36 functional questionnaire score was the main outcome. Secondary outcomes were self-reported and clinically-assessed pain provocation levels, pressure pain thresholds and pain tolerance. Treadmill walking time and speed were measured at t 0 and t 1 ; people also recorded the time spent walking each day in a diary., Results: The BWG exhibited significant improvements in all SF-36 items (except "emotional well-being") (P < 0.05), whereas the SWG exhibited improvements only in "pain" and "health change" items (P = 0.0001; effect size 0.13-0.94). Greater improvements were observed in the BWG than the SWG for "physical function" (P = 0.019) and "role limitations due to physical health" items (P = 0.035). Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in pain, with greater improvements in the BWG (P = 0.0001; effect size 0.89). Only the BWG showed significant improvements in pain pressure thresholds (P < 0.05; effect size 0.70) and pain tolerance (P < 0.001; effect size 0.67). Both groups significantly increased their speed and time spent walking on the treadmill (BWG Δ=19.7 min and Δ=1.7 km/h; SWG Δ=16.7 min and Δ=1.1 km/h) and time outdoors (SWG ∆=38.2 min/week; BWG mean ∆=48.5 min/week) (P < 0.001). All clinical tests of pain were significantly less positive in the BWG at all time points (P < 0.05)., Conclusions: Both walking programs benefited people with PPHP by alleviating pain and improving function and quality of life. Greater improvements were observed in the BWG than the SWG overall., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflict of interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The authors evaluated the comparative efficacy and safety of intramuscular olanzapine, intramuscular haloperidol, and intramuscular placebo for the treatment of acute agitation in schizophrenia., Method: Hospitalized patients with schizophrenia received one to three injections of intramuscular olanzapine, 10 mg, intramuscular haloperidol, 7.5 mg, or intramuscular placebo over a 24-hour period. Agitation was measured with the excited component of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and two additional scales., Results: According to scores on the excited component of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, both intramuscular olanzapine and intramuscular haloperidol reduced agitation significantly more than intramuscular placebo 2 and 24 hours following the first injection. Intramuscular olanzapine reduced agitation significantly more than intramuscular haloperidol 15, 30, and 45 minutes following the first injection. No patients treated with intramuscular olanzapine experienced acute dystonia, compared with 7% of those who were treated with intramuscular haloperidol. No significant QT(c) interval changes were observed in any patients., Conclusions: Intramuscular olanzapine represents a rapid, effective, and safe treatment for acute agitation in schizophrenia.