The Foot
Volume 20, Issue 1 , Pages 12-17 , March 2010

A comparison of electrosurgery and sharp debridement in the treatment of chronic neurovascular, neurofibrous and hard corns. A pragmatic randomised controlled trial

  • J.S. Bevans

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Department of Podiatry, Newton Heath Health Centre, 2, Old Church Street, Newton Heath, Manchester M40 2JF, UK.
  • ,
  • G. Bosson

Received 22 September 2008 ,Revised 26 July 2009 ,Accepted 11 March 2010.

References 

  1. Birrer RB, Dellacorte MP, Grisafi PJ. Common foot problems in primary care. Philadelphia: Hanley & Belfus; 1992;
  2. Tollafield DR, Merriman LM. Clinical skills in treating the foot. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 1997;
  3. In:  Motley RJ editors. A simple guide to the Hyfrecator. London: Schuco International; 2000;
  4. O’Donnell M, Lorimer DL, Forster MSK. Clinical therapeutics. In:  Lorimer DL,  French G,  O’Donnell M,  Burrow JG editor. Neale's disorders of the foot. 6th ed.. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone; 2002;p. 424–427
  5. Whinfield AL, Forster MSK. Effect of electrodessication on pain intensity associated with chronic heloma durum. The Foot. 1997;7:224–228
  6. Smith TJ, Morrison DC. A study into the use of electrosurgery for the treatment of vascular and neurovascular corns. The Chiropodist. 1986;41:164–170
  7. Smith TJ, Morrison DC. Further developments in the use of electrosurgery for the treatment of heloma durum. The Chiropodist. 1990;45:67–68
  8. Wilkinson AN, Kilmartin TE. A study into the long term effectiveness of electrosurgery for the treatment of corns. Br J Podiatry. 1998;(November):138–141
  9. Dexter F, Chestnut DH. Analysis of statistical tests to compare visual analog scale measurements among groups. Anesthesiology. 1995;82:896–902
  10. Kelly A-M. Does the clinically significant difference in Visual Analogue Scale pain scores vary with gender, age or cause of pain?. Acad Emerg Med. 1998;5(11):1086–1090
  11. Hollis S, Campbell F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 1999;319:670–674
  12. Montori VM, Guyatt GH. Intention to treat principle. Canadian Medical Association Journal November 13. Commentary. 2001;165(10):
  13. Kruse RL, Alper BS, Reust C, et al. Intention to treat analysis: who is in? Who is out? – Brief Report. J Family Pract. 2002;
  14. Intention to treat analysis (ITT). Bandolier. www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier.
  15. The Blog of Michael R. Eades, MD. The fraud of intention to treat analysis. www.proteinpower.com/drmike/bogus-studies/.
  16. Gerard E. Dallal, PhD. Intention-To-Treat Analysis. 25/11/2008. www.jerrydallal.com/LHSP/itt.htm.

PII: S0958-2592(10)00004-0

doi: 10.1016/j.foot.2010.03.003

The Foot
Volume 20, Issue 1 , Pages 12-17 , March 2010