Drugs & Aging

, Volume 36, Issue 3, pp 203–211 | Cite as

Clinical Assessment and Management of Foot and Ankle Osteoarthritis: A Review of Current Evidence and Focus on Pharmacological Treatment

  • Kade L. PatersonEmail author
  • Lucy Gates
Therapy in Practice


Foot and ankle osteoarthritis (OA) is a common and disabling problem that adversely affects physical function and significantly reduces quality of life. Although the knee was considered to be the lower-limb site most often affected by OA, recent population data showed foot OA is as prevalent as knee OA, and rates increase with advancing years. The most common foot OA sites include the first metatarsophalangeal joint and the midfoot, with the ankle affected less often. Despite the high prevalence and disabling nature of foot and ankle OA, the condition has been neglected by clinical researchers, and there are very few trials investigating non-surgical foot or ankle OA treatment options. There are no accepted clinical diagnostic criteria for foot or ankle OA so imaging remains common. Clinical guidelines based on knee and hip OA research recommend education, exercise, and weight loss in the first instance. Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or capsaicin may be used as an adjunct. Failing these approaches, acetaminophen (paracetamol) should be recommended; however, if there is inadequate symptomatic relief, then clinicians should trial an oral NSAID or a cyclo-oxygenase-2 inhibitor. Given that adverse events and co-morbidities are common in the elderly, older patients should be closely monitored. Some studies have investigated intra-articular injections for foot and ankle OA, and there is some evidence to suggest hyaluronic acid may be effective in the short term for ankle OA. With the lack of research on foot or ankle OA treatments, however, robust clinical trials are urgently needed.


Compliance with Ethical Standards


No sources of funding were used in the preparation of this article.

Conflict of Interest

Kade Paterson and Lucy Gates declare they have no conflicts of interest relating to the content of this article.


  1. 1.
    Pereira D, Peleteiro B, Araújo J, Branco J, Santos RA, Ramos E. The effect of osteoarthritis definition on prevalence and incidence estimates: a systematic review. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2011;19(11):1270–85.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Murphy L, Helmick CG. The impact of osteoarthritis in the United States: a population-health perspective: a population-based review of the fourth most common cause of hospitalization in U.S. adults. Orthop Nurs. 2012;31(2):85–91.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    UK National Joing Registry (NJR). 12th annual report: 2015. Hemel Hempstead: NJR; 2015.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cross M, Smith E, Hoy D, Nolte S, Ackerman I, Fransen M, et al. The global burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis: estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73:1323–30.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roddy E, Thomas MJ, Marshall M, Rathod T, Myers H, Menz HB, et al. The population prevalence of symptomatic radiographic foot osteoarthritis in community-dwelling older adults: cross-sectional findings from the clinical assessment study of the foot. Ann Rheum Dis. 2015;74(1):156–63.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Halstead J, Chapman GJ, Gray JC, Grainger AJ, Brown S, Wilkins RA, et al. Foot orthoses in the treatment of symptomatic midfoot osteoarthritis using clinical and biomechanical outcomes: a randomised feasibility study. Clin Rheumatol. 2016;35(4):987–96.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Thomas MJ, Peat G, Rathod T, Marshall M, Moore A, Menz HB, et al. The epidemiology of symptomatic midfoot osteoarthritis in community-dwelling older adults: cross-sectional findings from the Clinical Assessment Study of the Foot. Arthritis Res Ther. 2015;17(1):178.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Murray CL, Marshall M, Rathod T, Menz H, Roddy E. Population prevalence and distribution of ankle pain and symptomatic radiographic ankle osteoarthritis in community-dwelling older adults [abstract no. 043]. Rheumatol. 2016;55(suppl_1):79.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Saltzman CL, Salamon ML, Blanchard GM, Huff T, Hayes A, Buckwalter JA, et al. Epidemiology of ankle arthritis: report of a consecutive series of 639 patients from a tertiary orthopaedic center. Iowa Orthop J. 2005;25:44–6.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Menz HB, Lord SR. Foot pain impairs balance and functional ability in community-dwelling older people. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2001;91(5):222–9.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Menz HB, Morris ME, Lord SR. Foot and ankle risk factors for falls in older people: a prospective study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2006;61(8):866–70.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bergin SM, Munteanu SE, Zammit GV, Nikolopoulos N, Menz HB. Impact of first metatarsophalangeal joint osteoarthritis on health-related quality of life. Arthritis Care Res. 2012;64(11):1691–8.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Paterson KL, Hinman RS, Hunter DJ, Wrigley TV, Bennell KL. Impact of concurrent foot pain on health and functional status in people with knee osteoarthritis: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Arthritis Care Res. 2015;67(7):989–95.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Paterson KL, Kasza J, Hunter DJ, Hinman RS, Menz HB, Peat G, et al. The relationship between foot and ankle symptoms and risk of developing knee osteoarthritis: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2017;25(5):639–46.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Paterson KL, Kasza J, Hunter DJ, Hinman RS, Menz HB, Peat G, et al. Longitudinal association between foot and ankle symptoms and worsening of symptomatic radiographic knee osteoarthritis: data from the osteoarthritis initiative. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2017;25(9):1407–13.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Menz HB, Jordan KP, Roddy E, Croft PR. Characteristics of primary care consultations for musculoskeletal foot and ankle problems in the UK. Rheumatol. 2010;49(7):1391–8.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    van der Windt DAWM, Dunn KM, Spies-Dorgelo MN, Mallen CD, Blankenstein AH, Stalman WAB. Impact of physical symptoms on perceived health in the community. J Psychosom Res. 2008;64(3):265–74.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sayre EC, Li LC, Kopec JA, Esdaile JM, Bar S, Cibere J. The effect of disease site (knee, hip, hand, foot, lower back or neck) on employment reduction due to osteoarthritis. PLoS One. 2010;5(5):e10470.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Arthritis and Osteoporosis Victoria. A problem worth solving. The rising cost of musculoskeletal conditions in Australia. Elsternwick: Arthritis and Osteoporosis Victoria; 2013.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Menz HB, Munteanu SE, Landorf KB, Zammit GV, Cicuttini FM. Radiographic evaluation of foot osteoarthritis: sensitivity of radiographic variables and relationship to symptoms. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2009;17(3):298–303.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rathod T, Marshall M, Thomas MJ, Menz HB, Myers HL, Thomas E, et al. Investigations of potential phenotypes of foot osteoarthritis: cross-sectional analysis from the clinical assessment study of the foot. Arthritis Care Res. 2016;68(2):217–27.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Marshall M, Nicholls E, Kwok W-Y, Peat G, Kloppenburg M, van der Windt D, et al. Erosive osteoarthritis: a more severe form of radiographic hand osteoarthritis rather than a distinct entity? Annals Rheum Dis. 2015;74(1):136–41.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhang W, Doherty M, Peat G, Bierma-Zeinstra MA, Arden NK, Bresnihan B, et al. EULAR evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2010;69(3):483–9.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Golightly YM, Hannan MT, Dufour AB, Hillstrom HJ, Jordan JM. Foot disorders associated with overpronated and oversupinated foot function: the Johnston County osteoarthritis project. Foot Ankle Int. 2014;35(11):1159–65.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hagedorn TJ, Dufour AB, Riskowski JL, Hillstrom HJ, Menz HB, Casey VA, et al. Foot disorders, foot posture, and foot function: the Framingham Foot Study. PLoS One. 2013;8(9):e74364.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gates LS, Bowen CJ, Arden NK. Clinical measures of musculoskeletal foot and ankle assessment: an international consensus statement. Int J Health Sci Res. 2015;5(2):91–105.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hannan MT, Zimmer J, Sullivan E, Kiel DP. Physical limitations and foot disorders in elders. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49(4):S22.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Roddy E, Myers H, Thomas MJ, Marshall M, D’Cruz D, Menz HB, et al. The clinical assessment study of the foot (CASF): study protocol for a prospective observational study of foot pain and foot osteoarthritis in the general population. J Foot Ankle Res. 2011;4(1):22.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Thomas MJ, Roddy E, Rathod T, Marshall M, Moore A, Menz HB, et al. Clinical diagnosis of symptomatic midfoot osteoarthritis: cross-sectional findings from the Clinical Assessment Study of the Foot. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2015;23(12):2094–101.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Menz HB, Roddy E, Marshall M, Thomas MJ, Rathod T, Myers H, et al. Demographic and clinical factors associated with radiographic severity of first metatarsophalangeal joint osteoarthritis: cross-sectional findings from the Clinical Assessment Study of the Foot. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2015;23(1):77–82.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Menz HB, Munteanu SE, Zammit GV, Landorf KB. Foot structure and function in older people with radiographic osteoarthritis of the medial midfoot. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2010;18(3):317–22.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zammit GV, Munteanu SE, Menz HB. Development of a diagnostic rule for identifying radiographic osteoarthritis in people with first metatarsophalangeal joint pain. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2011;19(8):939–45.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Paterson KL, Hinman RS, Menz HB, Bennell KL. The ABC foot study: an international, multi-phase, mixed methods study of the assessment of beliefs and clinical practice for managing first metatarsophalangeal joint osteoarthritis [abstract no. 599]. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2018;26(Suppl. 1):S320.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sakellariou G, Conaghan PG, Zhang W, Bijlsma JWJ, Boyesen P, D’Agostino MA, et al. EULAR recommendations for the use of imaging in the clinical management of peripheral joint osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2017;76(9):1484–94.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Matsos M, Harish S, Zia P, Ho Y, Chow A, Ioannidis G, et al. Ultrasound of the hands and feet for rheumatological disorders: influence on clinical diagnostic confidence and patient management. Skelet Radiol. 2009;38(11):1049–54.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Paterson KL, Harrison C, Britt H, Hinman RS, Bennell KL. Management of foot/ankle osteoarthritis by Australian general practitioners: an analysis of national patient-encounter records. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2018;26(7):888–94.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Trivedi B, Marshall M, Belcher J, Roddy E. A systematic review of radiographic definitions of foot osteoarthritis in population-based studies. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2010;18(8):1027–35.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1957;16(4):494–502.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cicuttini FM, Spector TD. The epidemiology of osteoarthritis of the hand. Rev Rhum Malad Engl Ed. 1995;62(6):3S–8S.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Spector T, Hart D, Byrne J, Harris P, Dacre J, Doyle D. Definition of osteoarthritis of the knee for epidemiological studies. Ann Rheum Dis. 1993;52(11):790.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Schiphof D, Boers M, Bierma-Zeinstra SMA. Differences in descriptions of Kellgren and Lawrence grades of knee osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2008;67(7):1034–6.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Menz HB, Munteanu SE, Landorf KB, Zammit GV, Cicuttini FM. Radiographic classification of osteoarthritis in commonly affected joints of the foot. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2007;15(11):1333–8.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kraus VB, Kilfoil TM, Hash T II, McDaniel G, Renner JB, Carrino JA, et al. Atlas of radiographic features of osteoarthritis of the ankle and hindfoot. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2015;23(12):2059–85.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    National Clinical Guideline Centre. Osteoarthritis: care and management in adults. Clinical guideline CG177. Methods, evidence and recommendations. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2014.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    McAlindon TE, Bannuru RR, Sullivan MC, Arden NK, Berenbaum F, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, et al. OARSI guidelines for the non-surgical management of knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2014;22(3):363–88.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. Guideline for the management of knee and hip osteoarthritis. 2nd ed. East Melbourne: RACGP; 2018.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Fernandes L, Hagen KB, Bijlsma JWJ, Andreassen O, Christensen P, Conaghan PG, et al. EULAR recommendations for the non-pharmacological core management of hip and knee osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(7):1125–35.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Roberts E, Nunes VD, Buckner S, Latchem S, Constanti M, Miller P, et al. Paracetamol: not as safe as we thought? A systematic literature review of observational studies. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75(3):552–9.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Machado GC, Maher CG, Ferreira PH, Pinheiro MB, Lin C-WC, Day RO et al. Efficacy and safety of paracetamol for spinal pain and osteoarthritis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo controlled trials. BMJ. 2015;350:h1225.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Zeng C, Wei J, Persson MS, Sarmanova A, Doherty M, Xie D, et al. Relative efficacy and safety of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for osteoarthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Br J Sports Med. 2018;52(10):642–50.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Persson MSM, Stocks J, Walsh DA, Doherty M, Zhang W. The relative efficacy of topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and capsaicin in osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2018;26(12):1575–82.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Jennings MB, Alfieri DM. A controlled comparison of etodolac and naproxen in osteoarthritis of the foot. Lower Extremity. 1997;4(1):43–8.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Jennings M. Comparison of piroxicam and naproxen in osteoarthritis of the foot. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1994;84(7):348–54.Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Da Costa BR, Reichenbach S, Keller N, Nartey L, Wandel S, Jüni P, et al. Effectiveness of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for the treatment of pain in knee and hip osteoarthritis: a network meta-analysis. Lancet. 2017;390(10090):e21–33.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Vannabouathong C, Del Fabbro G, Sales B, Smith C, Li CS, Yardley D, et al. Intra-articular injections in the treatment of symptoms from ankle arthritis: a systematic review. Foot Ankle Int. 2018;39(10):1141–50.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Cohen MM, Altman RD, Hollstrom R, Hollstrom C, Sun C, Gipson B. Safety and efficacy of intra-articular sodium hyaluronate (Hyalgan®) in a randomized, double-blind study for osteoarthritis of the ankle. Foot Ankle Int. 2008;29(7):657–63.Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    DeGroot HI, Uzunishvili S, Weir R, Al-omari A, Gomes B. Intra-articular injection of hyaluronic acid is not superior to saline solution injection for ankle arthritis: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. J Bone Jt Surg. 2012;94(1):2–8.Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Karatosun V, Unver B, Ozden A, Ozay Z, Gunal I. Intra-articular hyaluronic acid compared to exercise therapy in osteoarthritis of the ankle. A prospective randomized trial with long-term follow-up. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2008;26(2):288–94.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Salk R, Chang T, D’Costa W, Soomekh D, Grogan K. Viscosupplementation (hyaluronans) in the treatment of ankle osteoarthritis. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2005;22(4):585–97.Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sun S-F, Hsu C-W, Lin H-S, Chou Y-J, Chen J-Y, Wang J-L. Efficacy of intraarticular botulinum toxin A and intraarticular hyaluronate plus rehabilitation exercise in patients with unilateral ankle osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial. J Foot Ankle Res. 2014;7(1):9.Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Munteanu SE, Zammit GV, Menz HB, Landorf KB, Handley CJ, Elzarka A, et al. Effectiveness of intra-articular hyaluronan (Synvisc, hylan G-F 20) for the treatment of first metatarsophalangeal joint osteoarthritis: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(10):1838–41.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Pons M, Alvarez F, Solana J, Viladot R, Varela L. Sodium hyaluronate in the treatment of hallux rigidus. A single-blind, randomized study. Foot Ankle Int. 2007;28(1):38–42.Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Protheroe D, Gadgil A. Guided intra-articular corticosteroid injections in the midfoot. Foot Ankle Int. 2018;39(8):1001–4.Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Drakonaki EE, Kho JS, Sharp RJ, Ostlere SJ. Efficacy of ultrasound-guided steroid injections for pain management of midfoot joint degenerative disease. Skelet Radiol. 2011;40(8):1001–6.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Shamus J, Shamus E, Gugel RN, Brucker BS, Skaruppa C. The effect of sesamoid mobilization, flexor hallucis strengthening, and gait training on reducing pain and restoring function in individuals with hallux limitus: a clinical trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2004;34(7):368–76.Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Menz HB, Auhl M, Tan JM, Levinger P, Roddy E, Munteanu SE. Effectiveness of foot orthoses versus rocker-sole footwear for first metatarsophalangeal joint osteoarthritis: randomized trial. Arthritis Care Res. 2016;68(5):581–9.Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Ibuki A, Cornoiu A, Clarke A, Unglik R, Beischer A. The effect of orthotic treatment on midfoot osteoarthritis assessed using specifically designed patient evaluation questionnaires. Prosthet Orthot Int. 2010;34(4):461–71.Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Rao S, Baumhauer JF, Becica L, Nawoczenski DA. Shoe inserts alter plantar loading and function in patients with midfoot arthritis. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2009;39(7):522–31.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Wilder FV, Barrett JP Jr, Farina EJ. Effect of regular exercise on the radiographic progression of foot osteoarthritis. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2005;95(4):342–6.Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Menz HB, Jordan KP, Roddy E, Croft PR. Musculoskeletal foot problems in primary care: what influences older people to consult? Rheumatol. 2010;49(11):2109–16.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Physiotherapy, Centre for Health, Exercise and Sports Medicine, School of Health SciencesThe University of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia
  2. 2.Arthritis Research UK Centre for Sport Exercise and OsteoarthritisUniversity of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations