Lasers in Medical Science

, Volume 33, Issue 6, pp 1363–1369 | Cite as

The effect of high-intensity versus low-level laser therapy in the management of plantar fasciitis: a randomized clinical trial

  • Banu Ordahan
  • Ali Yavuz Karahan
  • Ercan Kaydok
Original Article


We aimed to compare the efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) in the treatment of plantar fasciitis (PF). Seventy patients were randomized into either the LLLT (8 men, 27 women; mean age 48.65 ± 10.81 years) or HILT (7 men, 28 women; mean age 48.73 ± 11.41 years) groups. LLLT (904 nm) and HILT (1064 nm) were performed three times per week, over a period of 3 weeks. Each treatment combined with silicone insole and stretching exercises. Patients’ pain and functional status were evaluated with Visual Analog Scale, Heel Tenderness Index, and Foot and Ankle Outcome Score before and after treatment. A chi-square test was performed to compare demographic and clinical characteristics. Within-group and between-group differences were also investigated. Paired samples t test was used to analyze the differences between baseline and after treatment values, while independent samples t test was used to compare the two groups. Both groups contained similar demographic characteristics including age, sex, and body mass index (all p > 0.05). Three and two patients in the HILT and LLLT group, respectively, were lost to follow-up. At the study onset, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in the Visual Analog Scale, Heel Tenderness Index, and Foot And Ankle Outcome Scores. Three weeks later, both groups showed significant improvement in all parameters (p < 0.05). The HILT group demonstrated better improvement in all parameters than the LLLT group. Although both treatments improved the pain levels, function, and quality of life in patients with PF, HILT had a more significant effect than LLLT.


Low-level laser therapy High-intensity laser therapy Plantar fasciitis Visual Analog Scale Heel Tenderness Index 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in the studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration.


  1. 1.
    Goff JD, Crawford R (2011) Diagnosis and treatment of plantar fasciitis. Am Fam Physician 84:676–682PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roxas M (2005) Plantar fasciitis: diagnosis and therapeutic considerations. Altern Med Rev 10:83–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chang KV, Chen SY, Chen WS (2012) Comparative effectiveness of focused shock wave therapy of different intensity levels and radial shock wave therapy for treating plantar fasciitis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 93:1259–1268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tu P, Bytomski JR (2011) Diagnosis of heel pain. Am Fam Physician 84:909–916PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    League AC (2008) Current concepts review: plantar fasciitis. Foot Ankle Int 29:358–366CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yucel U, Kucuksen S, Cingoz HT (2013) Full-length silicone insoles versus ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection in the management of plantar fasciitis: a randomized clinical trial. Prosthetics Orthot Int 37:471–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wolgin M, Cook C, Graham C (1994) Conservative treatment of plantar heel pain: long-term follow-up. Foot Ankle Int 15:97–102CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ordahan B, Türkoğlu G, Karahan AY, Akkurt HE (2017) Extracorporeal shockwave therapy versus kinesiology taping in the management of plantar fasciitis: a randomized clinical trial. Arch Rheumatol 32:227–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Thomas JL, Christensen JC, Kravitz SR (2010) The diagnosis and treatment of heel pain: a clinical practice guideline-revision. J Foot Ankle Surg 49:S1–S19Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jastifer JR, Catena F, Doty JF, Stevens F, Coughlin MJ (2014) Low level laser therapy for the treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis: a prospective study. Foot Ankle Int 35:566–571CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kiritsi O, Tsitas K, Malliaropoulos N, Mikroulis G (2010) Ultrasonographic evaluation of plantar fasciitis after low-level laser therapy: results of a double blind, randomized, placebo controlled trial. Lasers Med Sci 25:275–281CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zati A, Valent A (2006) Laser therapy in medicine. In: Medica M (ed) Terapia Elsica: Nuove Tecnologie in Medicina Riabilitativa. Minerva Medica, Italy, p 162–85Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Karatepe AG, Gunaydin R, Kaya T (2009) Validation of the Turkish version of the foot and ankle outcome score. Rheumatol Int 30:169–173CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Basford RJ, Malanga AG, Krause AD, Harmsen SW (1998) Arandomized controlled evaluation of low intensity laser therapy: plantar fasciitis. Arch Phys Med Rehab 79:249–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Macias DM, Coughlin MJ, Zang K, Stevens FR, Jastifer JR, Doty JF (2015) Low-level laser therapy at 635 nm for treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis: a placebo- controlled, randomized study. J Foot Ankle Surg 54:768–772CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cinar E, Saxena S, Uygur F (2017) Low-level laser therapy in the management of plantar fasciitis: a randomized controlled trial. Laser Med Sci.
  17. 17.
    Tam G (1999) Low power laser therapy and analgesic action. J Clin Laser Med Surg 17:29–33Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    AlGhamdi KM, Kumar A, Moussa NA (2012) Low-level laser therapy: a useful technique for enhancing the proliferation of various cultured cells. Lasers Med Sci 27:237–49Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kujawa J, Zavodnik L, Zavodnik I, Buko V, Lapshyna A, Bryszewka M (2004) Effect of low-intensity (3.75–25 j/cm2) near-infrared (810 nm) laser radiation on red blood cell ATPase activities and membrane structure. J Clin Laser Med Surg 22:111–7Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Borzabadi-Farahani A (2016) Effect of low-level laser irradiation on proliferation of human dental mesenchymal stem cells; a systemic review. J Photochem Photobiol B 162:577–82Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Peplow PV, Chung TY, Baxter GD (2010) Application of low level laser Technologies for pain relief and wound healing: overview of scientific bases. Phys Ther Rev 15:253–85Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bjordal JM, Johnson MI, Iverson V, Aimbire F, Lopes-Martins RAB (2006) Photoradiation in acute pain: a systematic review of possible mechanisms of action and clinical effects in randomized placebo controlled trials. Photomed Laser Surg 24:158–68Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lim W, Lee S, Kim I, Chung M, Kim M, Lim H, Park J, Kim O, Choi H (2007) The anti-inflammatory mechanism of 635 nm light-emitting-diode irradiation compared with existing COX inhibitors. Lasers Surg Med 39:614-21Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kheshie AR, Alayat MSM, Ali MME (2014) High-intensity versus low-level laser therapy in the treatment of patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial. Laser Med Sci 29(4):1371-6Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Alayat MSM, Atya AM, Ali MME, Shosha TM (2014) Long-term effect of high-intensity laser therapy in the treatment of patients with chronic low back pain: a randomized blinded placebo-controlled trial. Lasers Med Sci 29(3):1065–73Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Alayat MS, Elsodany AM, El Fiky AA (2014) Efficacy of high and low level laser therapy in the treatment of Bell's palsy:a randomized double blind placebo-controlled trial. Lasers Med Sci 29:335–42Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    SantamatoA,Solfrizzi V, Panza F, Tondi G, Frisardi V, Leggin BG, Ranieri M, Fiore P (2009) Short-term effects of high-intensity laser therapy versus ultrasound therapy in the treatment of people with subacromial impingement syndrome:a randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther 89:643–52Google Scholar
  28. 28.
     Dundar U, Turkmen U, Toktaş H, Ulaslı AM, Solak O (2015) Effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy and splinting in lateral epicondylitis; a prospective randomized controlled study. Lasers Med Sci 30:1097–107Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stiglic-Rogoznica N, Stamenkovic D, Frlan-Vrgoc L, Avancini-Dobrovic V, Vrbanic TS (2011) Analgesic effect of high intensity laser therapy in knee osteoarthritis. Coll Antropol 35(2):183–5Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kim C, Cashdollar MR, Mendicino RW, Catanzariti AR, Fuge L (2010) Incidence of plantar fascia ruptures following corticosteroid injection. Foot Ankle Spec 3:335–7Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Acevedo JI, Beskin JL (1998) Complications of plantar fascia rupture associated with corticosteroid injection. Foot Ankle Int 19:91–7Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Brinks A, Koes BW, Volkers AC, Verhaar JA, Bierma-Zeinstra SM (2010) Adverse effects of extra-articular corticosteroid injections: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskeletal Disord 11:206 Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Salvioli S, Guidi M, Marcotulli G (2017) The effectiveness of conservative, non-pharmacological treatment of plantar heel pain: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Foot 33:57–67Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Banu Ordahan
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ali Yavuz Karahan
    • 3
  • Ercan Kaydok
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationKonya Education and Training HospitalKonyaTurkey
  2. 2.Yazırmah, Beyhekim State HospitalSelçukluTurkey
  3. 3.Department of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationUşak UniversityUşakTurkey
  4. 4.Department of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationÖmer Halis Demir UniversityNiğdeTurkey

Personalised recommendations