Plantar Fascia Thickness and Pedobarometric Parameters in Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction

NCT07887100 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: 2026/02-19
• Study Type: observational
• Target: 52
• Locations: 1 country
• Sites: 1

Brief Summary

This study aims to compare plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters between individuals with sacroiliak joint dysfunction and healty individuals.A total of 52 adult volunteers aged 18 to 50 years were included in the study, with 26 pariticipants in the sacroiliac joint dysfunction group and 26 participants in the healty control group.Participants with sacroiliac joint dysfunction were identified based on clinical examination and sacroiliac joint pain provocation tests. Foot posture was evaluated using the Foot Posture Index-6 (FPI-6), and participants with neutral foot posture were included. Plantar fascia thickness of both feet was measured using ultrasound. Static foot pressure measurements were performed during standing with eyes open and closed, and dynamic foot pressure measurements were performed during walking using a pedobarometric system. The study compares plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters between the sacroiliak joint dysfunction and control groups. It also investigates the relationship between plantar fascia thickness and pedobarometric parameters.

Conditions

Plantar Fascia Thickness; Pedobarography; Pedobarometric; Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction; Foot Posture Index Score

Keywords

Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction; Plantar fascia thickness; pedobarography; Foot Posture Index Score; pedobarometric

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (9)

• Plantar Fascia Thickness

  Plantar fascia thickness was measured by ultrasonography in the sagittal plane at the calcaneal insertion of the fascia. Three measurements were taken for each foot, and their mean was recorded in millimeters.

  At enrollment (single assessment visit)

• Center of Force Ellipse Area

  Center of force (CoF) ellipse area was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in square centimeters.

  At enrollment (single assessment visit)

• Center of Force Path Length

  Center of force (CoF) path length was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.

  At enrollment (single assessment visit)

• Center of Force Variability

  Center of force (CoF) variability was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.

  At enrollment (single assessment visit)

• Center of Force Anteroposterior Excursion

  Center of Force Anteroposterior Excursion was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.

  At enrollment (single assessment visit)

• Center of Force Mediolateral Excursion

  Center of Force Mediolateral Excursion was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded in centimeters.

  At enrollment (single assessment visit)

• Total Foot Load

  The percentage of body weight borne by each foot was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded as a percentage of body weight.

  At enrollment (single assessment visit)

• Forefoot Load

  The percentage of body weight borne by the forefoot region of each foot was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded as a percentage of body weight.

  At enrollment (single assessment visit)

• Rearfoot Load

  The percentage of body weight borne by the rearfoot region of each foot was measured with a TekScan MatScan pressure mat under static (eyes open and eyes closed) and dynamic (three-step protocol) conditions. Each measurement was repeated three times, and the mean was recorded as a percentage of body weight.

  At enrollment (single assessment visit)

Study Arms (2)

Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction Group

Patients with low back pain who were diagnosed with sacroiliac joint dysfunction when at least three of six pain provocation tests were positive on the same side. No intervention was applied. Plantar fascia thickness was measured by ultrasonography, and static and dynamic pedobarometric assessments were performed.

Healthy Control Group

Healthy volunteers without sacroiliac joint dysfunction, selected to be similar to the patient group in age, sex, and body mass index. No intervention was applied. Participants underwent the same ultrasonographic and pedobarometric assessments as the patient group.

Eligibility Criteria

• Age: 18 Years - 50 Years
• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: Yes
• Age Groups: Adult (18-64)
• Sampling Method: Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Patients with sacroiliac joint dysfunction were enrolled consecutively from individuals aged 18 to 50 years who presented with low back pain to the Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation outpatient clinic of Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Medicine. Healthy volunteers of the same age range were recruited as controls from the staff of Dokuz Eylul University Faculty of Medicine and Faculty of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation and through announcements in these units

You may qualify if:

• Sacroiliac joint dysfunction group:
• Age 18 to 50 years
• Low back pain for at least 3 months, localized mainly around the posterior superior iliac spine, with or without radiation to the buttock or posterior thigh
• At least three of six sacroiliac joint pain provocation tests (FABER, Gaenslen, thigh thrust, sacral thrust, compression, and distraction) positive on the same side
• Foot Posture Index-6 score between 0 and +5 in both feet
• Healthy control group:
• Age 18 to 50 years
• No diagnosis of sacroiliac joint dysfunction and no related complaints (all six sacroiliac joint pain provacation tests (FABER, Gaenslen, thigh thrust, sacral thrust, compression, and distraction) negative bilaterally )
• Foot Posture Index-6 score between 0 and +5 in both feet

You may not qualify if:

• Systemic rheumatologic disease (e.g., rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis)
• Metabolic bone disease (e.g., osteoporosis, osteomalacia)
• Active lumbar disc herniation or radiculopathy
• Previous fracture, surgery, or structural deformity of the lower extremity
• Pregnancy
• Body mass index above 30 kg/m2
• Diabetes mellitus and/or hypothyroidism
• Regular exercise on more than three days per week
• Occupation requiring prolonged standing (e.g., teacher, surgeon, waiter)
• Walking more than 5 km per day
• Physical therapy and/or injection treatment to the foot or ankle within the past 6 months
• Previous diagnosis or history of plantar fasciitis
• Central or peripheral nervous system disease (e.g., stroke, peripheral neuropathy, tarsal tunnel syndrome, Morton's neuroma)
• Lower extremity length discrepancy of 1 cm or more
• Use of orthopedic insoles, special footwear, or orthoses

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Dokuz Eylul University: lead

Study Sites (1)

Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Medical Faculty of Dokuz Eylül University

Izmir, 35330, Turkey (Türkiye)

Location

Study Design

• Study Type: observational
• Observational Model: CASE CONTROL
• Time Perspective: CROSS SECTIONAL
• Sponsor Type: OTHER
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Associate Professor

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: October 15, 2026
• First Posted: October 21, 2026
• Study Start: March 2, 2026
• Primary Completion: September 1, 2026
• Study Completion: September 1, 2026
• Last Updated: October 21, 2026

Record last verified: 2026-09

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share

Locations

TU (1)