Review Article

Is the Wedged Insole an Effective Treatment Option When Compared with a Flat (Placebo) Insole: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Table 1

Basic characteristics of the included trials.

Study IDKellgren and Lawrence (K&L)Age(yrs)
Exp/cont
Sample size
Exp/cont
BMIInterventionTime pointMain outcomes
Experiment groupControl group

Kim 2011 [23] AustraliaII:95
III:105
63.3±8.1/65±7.9103/9728.1±4.2/30.4±5.6lateral wedge insolesflat control insoles12 monthsPain(VAS), WOMAC

Bennell 2010 [28]
Australia
NANA89/90NAlateral wedge insolesflat control insoles12 monthsAverage pain(VAS)

Gustavo 2015 [29]
Brazil
I:4
II:19
III:13
IV:22
65.2±9.6/63.3±7.529/2930.8±6.1/30.3±5.1lateral wedge insoles with subtalar strappinga neutral insole with subtalar
strapping
24 weeksWOMAC, VAS, Lequesne index

Maillefert 2001 [21]
France
II:73
III:64
IV:19
64±10.8/65.6±9.982/7429±5.6/28.5±5.3laterally-wedged insolesneutrally-wedged insoles6 monthsWOMAC

Priscilla 2008 [20]
Brazil
II:16
III:8
IV:6
61.6±11.4/61.9±11.316/1428.9±3.5/30.6±3.1insoles with medial elevationsimilar insole without elevation2 weeksWOMAC, VAS, Lequesne index, Femorotibial angle

Pham 2004 [30]
France
NA64±10.8/65.6±9.982/7429±5.6/28.5±5.3Laterally-wedged insolesNeutrally-wedged insoles2 yearsWOMAC

Ryan 2016 [31]
Canada
I:9
II:6
III:5
IV:18
59.9±7.4/59.6±7.719/1932.5±8/29.2±6.7wedged insolesFlat insoles3 monthsKOOS pain score

Toda 2005 [22]
Japan
NA63.6±9.9/62±9.821/2224.5±4 /25.5±4.3lateral wedge with subtalar strappingsubtalar strapping band without lateral wedge2 weeksLequesne index, Femorotibial angle

Toda 2005
Japan
NA64.1±12.3/62±9.820/2223.8±3.2/25.5±4.3lateral wedge with subtalar strappingsubtalar strapping band without lateral wedge2 weeksLequesne index, Femorotibial angle

Toda 2005
Japan
NA64.7±9.7/62±9.818/2224.2±2.3/25.5±4.3lateral wedge with subtalar strappingsubtalar strapping band without lateral wedge2 weeksLequesne index, Femorotibial angle,

WOMAC =Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index; VAS = visual analogue scale.