Introduction



Is there a place for kinesiotape in modern osteopathic practice?Author: Richard Moore, 07004959AbstractBackgroundKinesiotaping (KT) was developed by Kenso Kase in the 1970s as a method of assisting physical treatment of damaged tissue whilst maintaining full range of motion. It works by lifting the epidermis to reduce compression of underlying tissues and aid venous and lymphatic movement. The aim of this paper was to identify evidence for the use of KT in the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions and suggest how this could inform osteopathic treatment.MethodA critical literature review was conducted to investigate the effect of KT on musculoskeletal conditions. Five electronic databases (PUBMED, AMED, PEDRO, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus) and five key websites were searched up to 19th November 2011. 9 randomised controlled trials met specified inclusion criteria. The CASP RCT appraisal tool was used to assess validity and quality of each trial.ResultsThree papers discussed use of KT in patello-femoral pain, three for shoulder impingement, one for whiplash-affected disorder, one for plantar fasciitis and one for chronic low back pain. Methodology was varied with taping protocols, comparison and measured outcomes inconsistent across the studies. Positive effects were seen in muscle flexibility, pain, disability and fascia thickness when compared to manual therapy and sham taping.ConclusionDespite considerable heterogeneity of study design, positive effects of KT have been identified and could be utilised by osteopaths in the treatment of acute or chronic conditions. Further research with larger study groups and homogeneous methodology should be undertaken to provide definitive results in treatment of named conditions.Keywords: kinesiotaping, osteopathy, patellofemoral pain, shoulder impingement (250 words)Contents TOC \o "1-3" Introduction PAGEREF _Toc193984011 \h 3Aims PAGEREF _Toc193984012 \h 7Methods PAGEREF _Toc193984013 \h 8Results PAGEREF _Toc193984014 \h 12Emergent Themes PAGEREF _Toc193984015 \h 17Discussion PAGEREF _Toc193984016 \h 18Kinesiotaping as a viable alternative PAGEREF _Toc193984017 \h 22Limitations of studies assessing efficacy of kinesiotape PAGEREF _Toc193984018 \h 23Limitations of this review PAGEREF _Toc193984019 \h 24Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc193984020 \h 25Opportunities for future research PAGEREF _Toc193984021 \h 25Acknowledgments PAGEREF _Toc193984022 \h 25References PAGEREF _Toc193984023 \h 26IntroductionKinesiotaping was developed by Japanese chiropractor Kenso Kase in the 1970s as a method of assisting physical treatment of damaged tissue whilst maintaining full range of motion, unlike traditional taping methods, which restrict movement (Kinesio UK, 2011). Popular applications include patellar or achilles tendinopathy, acute shoulder impingement and lower back strain (Konin, 2010). The Kinesio Taping Association (KTA) has over 10,000 members worldwide and is training professionals at a rate of over 800 per year in the UK alone (Slater, 2012). Kinesiotape (KT) first gained widespread attention at the 1988 Seoul Olympics, where 50,000 rolls were donated to 58 countries, giving the product exposure on the world stage (Lowes, 2008). Since then, high profile athletes such as Lance Armstrong, Rory McIlroy and David Beckham have popularised use of the tape (Wintle, 2012). KT’s ability to longitudinally stretch and the direction that it is applied, offers the therapeutic value (Kase et al, 2003). The tape works by lifting the epidermis, as the tape recoils after being applied with tension (Figure 1). This lifting increases interstitial space between the skin and the underlying connective tissues, vessels and muscles to reduce compression and aid lymphatic and venous movement (Yoshida & Kahanov, 2007). Non-Taped Area= blood and lymph vessels compressed beneath epidermisTaped/“Lifted” area= reduced compression on interstitial spaceFigure 1: The effect of kinesiotape on the skin and underlying tissue (Hitech Therapy, 2012). The ‘lifting’ also has an effect on underlying fascia, reducing pain, decreasing susceptibility to microtrauma and improving muscle performance (O'Sullivan & Bird, 2011).The therapeutic effect is the same for all available colours and is dependant on how the tape is applied. Figure 2 demonstrates a typical application to inhibit a strained muscle, tension being applied distally to proximally along the muscle, with 15-25% tension. Figure 3 shows application in the opposite direction to facilitate a weakened muscle, with 15-35% tension. Figure 2: Muscle Inhibition. Figure 3: Muscle Facilitation(Biceps brachii) (Biceps brachii) Application to aid oedema is shown in Figure 4. A single strip is cut into multiple tails placed over the oedema with 0-20% tension. The ‘head’ of the tape is placed towards the target lymph nodes. KT can also be used to stabilise by placing it over the unstable joint, with all the stretch removed, applying over 75% tension (Figure 5). Figure 4: Lymphatic correction. Figure 5: Mechanical support (Acromioclavicular joint) The effect on healthy individuals has been the subject of observational studies, focussed on a range of outcomes, including muscle strength and motor nerve conduction. Of the fifteen trials identified (Table 1) seven returned positive results in all or some of the outcomes measured, whilst the remaining studies found nil or inconclusive results. Where numerous trials have looked at the same outcome, results are contradictory. In the case of grip strength, Chang et al (2010) found no positive effect from KT applied to the forearm, compared to sham and no taping, whilst Lee et al (2010) found a clear improvement in grip strength, albeit without a control group.Similar contradiction is found in studies looking at effect on the quadriceps. Aktas & Baltaci (2011) found a positive effect on jump height, S?upik et al (2007) noticed an increase in motor unit recruitment after taping, whilst Vithoulkaa et al (2010) found that the overall effects of KT mixed, with eccentric force improved but concentric force the same as control and Fu et al (2008) found no positive effect. Table 1: Studies investigating physiological effects of kinesiotaping in healthy individualsStudyEffect tested / ApplicationSample sizeOutcomeAktas & Baltaci, 2011Muscle strengthJump height(quadriceps)20 (9 male, 11 female)Positive(jump & peak torque)Chang et al, 2010Grip strength(forearm flexors)21 (all male).NilFirth et al, 2010Single leg hop test, pain.(Achilles tendon)48 (24 asymptomatic, 24 achilles tendonitis)NilFu et al, 2008Muscle strength(quadriceps and hamstrings)14 (7 male, 7 female).NilHalseth et al, 2004Proprioception(lateral & medial lower leg)30 (15 male. 15 female)NilHombrados-Hernándeza et al, 2011Sporting performance(diaphragm)17 (10 male, 7 female)NilHuang et al, 2011Vertical jump(triceps surae)31 (19 male, 12 female)NilLee et al, 2010Grip strength(forearm flexors)40 (20 male, 20 female)Positive Lee et al, 2011Motor nerve conduction velocity17 (9 male, 8 female)NilLee, Yoo & Hwang-Bo, 2011Pelvic tilt (lumbar erector spinae) 40 (23 male, 17 female).Positive Lou, 2008Motor perception(knee)19 (9 male, 8 female)PositiveS?upik et al, 2007Muscle activity(Vastus medialis)27 (15 male, 12 female)PositiveSoylu et al, 2011Muscle strength(masseter)11 (7 male, 4 female)NilVithoulkaa et al, 2010Muscle strength(quadriceps)20 (all female)Positive (eccentric torque)Yoshida & Kahanov, 2007Trunk range of motion(lumbar erector spinae)30 (15 male, 15 female)Positive (flexion only)Overall, studies involving healthy individuals found some positive effect on muscle strength (Soylu et al 2011, Lee et al 2010, Vithoulkaa et al 2010), flexibility (Yoshida & Kahanov 2007, Lee et al 2011) and motor nerve conduction (Lee et al 2011), suggesting that KT could be used in the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions. Further examination of studies investigating the use of KT is indicated along with how this information could successfully be used by osteopaths in the treatment of common musculoskeletal conditions, adhering to established osteopathic principles.AimsIt is the aim of this paper to identify evidence for the use of kinesiotaping in the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions and how this information could be used in an osteopathic setting.Studies will be included if investigating the use of the KT in a pathological state through a controlled trial, with observational studies or those conducted solely on healthy individuals excluded. Based on these findings, the implications on osteopathic care will be discussed and opportunities for further research suggested.This is framed in the question: “Is there a place for kinesiotaping in modern osteopathic practice?” MethodsAs an initial search of the Cochrane Library found no existing systematic or literature reviews, PUBMED, AMED, CINAHL, PEDRO and SPORTDiscus databases were searched up to 19th November 2011, with the following string:(kinesio tap*) OR (kinesiotap*) OR (k-tap*)Additional to the database searching, the websites of the Osteopathic Research Web (osteopathic-), OSTMED (ostmed-), Journal Of American Osteopathic Association (), Chiropractic & Manual Therapies () and Open Grey (opengrey.eu) were also searched. Once all duplicates had been removed, inclusion and exclusion criteria (Table 3) were applied to these results. To focus results, all studies where kinesiotape was not the primary focus were removed, as were treatments for non-musculoskeletal conditions such as cerebral palsy and breast cancer. Observational studies on healthy individuals were also discarded. Only controlled trials were selected for review.Hand searching of the selected papers returned ten additional papers, one of which met all the relevant inclusion and exclusion criteria. This gave a total of nine papers to be assessed (Figure 8).The nine studies selected were then subjected to the CASP assessment tool (Table 4). All papers submitted for CASP assessment were found to be of a high enough quality to be included in the review. Table 3: Selection criteria for papers investigating efficacy of kinesiotape in treatment of musculoskeletal conditions.Inclusion criteriaExclusion criteriaReasoningPopulationHumanPrimary MSK condition being treatedNon-humanHealthy individualsNon-MSK presentation e.g. cerebral palsyTo focus on conditions that may typically present to an osteopath to maximise relevanceTo identify effect on pathological state rather than effect on healthy tissuesInterventionKinesiotape only Application by trained professionals using recognised techniquesNon-elastic tapeMulti-modal interventions/comparisonsApplications not specified, described or focussed on condition being treatedTo identify studies looking at kinesiotape rather than traditional athletic tape / ‘McConnell’ tapeTo focus on effect of kinesiotape To ensure tape is used effectivelyControlControl group receiving sham or no tapingLack of control groupTo measure effect of tape against sham / no tape or alternative intervention rather than alternative taping applicationsOutcome Studies using objective methods to identify change is muscle activity, range of motion in specific muscles/joints alongside subjective measures Studies solely using subjective measures such as pain scales Studies not relating findings to identified pathologyTo reduce possibility of bias CITATION Kan04 \l 2057 (Kane, 2004)To identify effect of intervention on identified pathologyStudy designRandomised controlled clinical trials, controlled clinical trials, controlled pilot studies Published in English language Independent from tape manufacturer, trainer or distributorPublished in past 10 yearsCase reportsObservational studies on asymptomatic participantsNon-English languageLiterature reviews, meta-analysesStudies funded by tape manufacturers / trainersFocus on highest form of evidence CITATION Sac96 \l 2057 (Sackett, Rosenberg, Gray, Haynes, & Richardson, 1996)Primary studies only CITATION Ave08 \p 23 \l 2057 (Aveyard, 2008, p. 23)English language studies can only be used due to resource limitationsTo reduce possibility of biasMost recent material onlySearching electronic databases (n=117)PubMed27Osteopathic Research Web 0PEDro17OSTMED 0CINAHL43JAOA 0AMED24Chiropractic & Manual Therapy 0SPORTDiscus6Open Grey 0Abstracts retrieved (n=68)Duplicates removed (n=49)Papers reviewed(n=33)Excluded (n=35)Case reports9Articles10Non-English16Papers selected(n=8)Excluded (n=25)Non-MSK3Healthy individuals8Non-controlled11Multimodal3Reference list searches (n=10)Excluded (n=9)Non-English3Case reports2Healthy individuals3Non-controlled1Multimodal3Additional papers (n=1)Papers selected for review (n=9)Figure 8: Flowchart showing literature selection process for papers investigating efficacy of kinesiotape in treatment of musculoskeletal conditions.Table 4: Critical appraisal results using CASP tool for selected papers investigating efficacy of kinesiotape in treatment of musculoskeletal conditions.CASP Questions ( = Yes; ? = Unclear; = No)12345678910Akbas et al (2011)??Aytar et al (2011)??Chen et al (2008)??Gonzalez-Iglesias et al (2009)?Hsu et al (2008)?Kaya et al (2010)Paoloni et al (2011)?Thelen et al (2008)Tsai et al (2010)? ResultsNine studies were identified with a total of 326 participants, investigating the effect of kinesiotape (KT) on patellofemoral pain (n=3), shoulder impingement (SI) (n=3), whiplash affected disorder (n=1), chronic lower back pain (n=1) and plantar fasciitis (n=1). Table 5 summarises the results for the use of KT in patello-femoral pain (PFPS). Akbas et al (2011) found that KT in conjunction with strengthening exercises and soft tissue massage achieved faster improvements (significant at three weeks) in both pain and muscle flexibility when compared to exercise and massage alone, although final outcome levels at six weeks were similar in both groups. The two remaining studies (Aytar et al, 2011 and Chen et al, 2008) looked at the effects of KT immediately after application. Aytar et al (2011) examined the effect on pain alongside balance, proprioception and muscle strength when compared to sham tape. Although there were no statistically significant differences in pain and proprioception after application, positive effects were seen on muscle strength and dynamic balance in the KT group. Finally, Chen et al (2008) investigated the effects on stair climbing and found ground force reaction reduced when descending and muscle firing improved in the symptomatic KT group. No positive results were seen in the asymptomatic group despite identical application of KT.Table 6 summarises the results for the use of KT in shoulder impingement. Hsu et al (2009) adopted a pre-test and post-test model, comparing KT to sham tape applied across the lower trapezius of symptomatic baseball players. Scapular movement improved in both groups, as did activation of the upper trapezius and serratus anterior but the KT group also showed improvements in activity and strength of the lower fibres of trapezius.Thelan et al (2008) and Kaya et al (2010) both investigated the effects on pain and disability, with a similar taping protocol across supraspinatus, deltoid and teres minor.Table 5: Summary of results from selected papers investigating efficacy of kinesiotape in treatment of patello-femoral pain syndrome (PFPS).StudyPresenting condition Outcomes measuredExperimental groupControl groupSummary of resultsAkbas et al, 2011PFPS (n = 31)1. Pain2. Soft tissue flexibility3. Patellar positioning1. KT to facilitate quadriceps, ilio-tibial band (ITB) and hamstrings2. Strengthening exercises3. Soft tissue massage(n = 16)1. Strengthening exercises2. Soft tissue massage(n = 15)Pain, flexibility improved in both groups by end of trial Flexibility of soft tissues (hamstrings and ITB) occurred faster and greater in KT groupNeither group saw positive change in patellar positionAytar et al, 2011PFPS (n = 22)1. Pain2. Muscle strength3. Proprioception4. BalanceKT to quadriceps and around patella(n = 12)Identical taping but with non-flexible sticking plaster(n = 10)Strength improved in both groups (60 = both, 180 = KT only)Balance improved in both groups (static = both, dynamic = KT only)No significant changes in pain or proprioception in either groupChen et al, 2008PFPS (n = 25)1. Ground force reaction (GRF)2. Muscle firingKT to facilitate vastus medialis and inhibit vastus lateralis – PFPS sufferers(n = 15)Identical taping in healthy individuals(n = 10)No positive effect seen in healthy individualsGRF reduced in descending stairs in KT groupTiming of activation of vastus medialis improved in KT groupKey: KT = Kinesiotaping ; PFPS = Patello-femoral Pain SyndromeKaya et al (2010) compared KT applied every three days, along with guided home exercises, to a daily programme of ultrasound, TENS, heat pack and home exercise. Pain levels at the end of the two-week trial were similar in both groups but the KT group improved faster with significant differences at the end of week one. Disability scores were more improved (a drop from 57.5 to 18 compared with a drop from 56 to 31 on the DASH 100-point score) in the KT group at the end of the trial.Thelan et al (2008) compared KT to sham tape over a six-day period. By the end of the trial, both groups achieved similar results for improvement of pain-free range of movement but the KT group achieved results after just three days compared to six days for the control group. There was no significant difference in pain or disability in either group by the end of the trial.Table 7 summarises the results for the use of KT in chronic low back pain (CLBP), whiplash affected disorder (WAD) and plantar fasciitis (PF).Gonzalez-Iglesias et al (2009) investigated the effect of KT on pain and cervical range of motion following WAD over a 24 hour period when compared to sham KT (applied with no tension). Although there were statistically-significant improvements to both pain and range of motion in the KT group at the end of the trial, both were at levels deemed not clinically relevant.Paolini et al (2011) studied the effects on chronic low back pain across three groups; KT only, KT plus home exercises and home exercises only. An immediate effect was seen on pain in all KT groups but it was the home exercise group that showed most improvement in disability at the end of the 4-week trial.The last paper, Tsai et al (2010) focussed on plantar fasciitis, comparing KT with daily physical therapy. Both pain and foot function improved more in the KT group and there was a significant reduction in plantar fascia thickness, as measured by ultrasound, at the insertion site on the calcaneus in the KT group. However, plantar fascia thickness at the site of most significant inflammation was unchanged in both groups.Table 6: Summary of results from selected papers investigating efficacy of kinesiotape in treatment of shoulder impingement (SI).StudyPresenting condition Outcomes measuredExperimental groupControl groupSummary of resultsHsu, et al, 2009Shoulder impingement(n = 17)1. Shoulder kinematics2. Muscle activity3. Muscle strengthKT to lower trapezius(n = 17)Identical taping but with non-flexible 3M tape(n = 17)Improved scapular posterior tilt at 30-60 in both groupsIncreased lower trapezius activity at 60-30 in KT groupDecreased activity in same range in control groupIncrease in serratus anterior and upper trapezius activity in bothIncrease in strength of lower trapezius in KT groupKaya et al, 2010Shoulder impingement(n = 55)1. Pain2. DisabilityKT over supraspinatus, deltoid and teres minor+ home exercise program(n = 30)Ultrasound, TENS, heat pack and exercise daily+ home exercise program(n = 25)Pain improved equally by end of trial but improvement was initially faster in KT groupDisability scores lower in KT group than control group at end of trialThelen et al, 2008Shoulder impingement(n = 42)1. Pain2. Disability3. Range of movement (ROM)KT over supraspinatus and deltoid and across coracoid process(n = 21)KT applied with no tension in non-therapeutic areas(n = 21)Immediate improvement in ROM in KT group but similar improvement in both groups at end of trialNo significant improvements to pain or disability in either groupKey: KT = Kinesiotaping ; SI = Shoulder ImpingementTable 7: Summary of results from selected papers investigating efficacy of kinesiotape in treatment of whiplash-affected disorder (WAD), chronic low back pain (CLBP) and plantar fasciitis (PF).StudyPresenting condition Outcomes measuredExperimental groupControl groupSummary of resultsGonzalez-Iglesias et al, 2009WAD(n = 41)1. Pain2. Cervical spine ROMKT along posterior neck and across lower cervical spine(n = 21)KT applied with no tension in similar position(n = 20)Improvements to cervical ROM and pain in KT group were statistically but not clinically relevantPaoloni, et al, 2011CLBP(n = 39)1. Pain2. Disability3. Muscle function (FR ability) KT along lumber erector spinae and midline (3 strips total)(n = 13)Note: All participants taped initially for immediate results on pain and FR(n = 39)KT applied in same way + home exercises(n = 13)Home exercises only(n = 13)Immediate reduction in pain in all KT groupsImproved FR in 17/39 initiallyPain improved in all groups at end of trialDisability improved most in non-KT groupFR most improved at end of trial in KT + Exercise groupTsai et al, 2010PF(n = 52)1. Pain2. Foot function3. Thickness of plantar fascia in 2 positionsKT over gastrocnemius and plantar fascia+ daily physical therapy (ultrasound, TENS)(n = 26)Daily physical therapy only(n = 26)Immediate improvement in pain and foot function in KT groupReduction in plantar fascia thickness in KT group in 1 of 2 designated sites onlyKey: KT = Kinesiotaping ; PF = Plantar Fasciitis ; CLBP = Chronic Low Back Pain ; WAD = Whiplash Associated Disorder ; FR = Flexion-RelaxationEmergent ThemesAs described in the Methodology, a number of themes can be taken from the above results (Table 8). The papers identified a number of conditions that KT could potentially be used to treat and there were a number of recurring minor themes, namely the use of KT as a cost-effective alternative to traditional interventions such as ultrasound, TENS and home exercise and the efficacy of KT on muscle tissue and fascia in the immediate and short term.Table 8: Themes drawn from selected papers investigating efficacy of kinesiotape in treatment of musculoskeletal conditions.Major ThemesMinor ThemesKinesiotaping as a treatment for musculoskeletal pain, namely: Patello-femoral painShoulder impingementOther conditionsChronic low back painWhiplash affected disorderPlantar fasciitisKinesiotaping as a cost-effective alternative to ultrasound, exercise therapy or TENSKinesiotaping as a fast-acting/short-term treatmentEffect of kinesiotaping on muscle tissue and fasciaDiscussionThe purpose of this literature review was to identify evidence for the use of kinesiotape (KT) in the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions and its role in osteopathic practice. Nine papers satisfied inclusion and exclusion criteria, with significant variability in study design, methodology and quality (Table 9). Figure 9: Taping protocols for Patello-Femoral Pain Syndromea) Akbas et al 2011, b) Aytar et al 2011, c) Chen et al 2008 (not illustrated in paper)All three papers addressing the use of KT in treating patello-femoral pain (Akbas et al, 2011; Aytar et al, 2011; Chen et al, 2008) hypothesised that pain is caused by maltracking of the patella, following imbalance between vastus medialis and vastus lateralis due to the Q angle (Levangie & Norkin, 2001) and taped accordingly (Figure 9).Despite similar hypotheses, heterogeneity of methodology across the three studies makes direct comparison difficult (Table 5). Both Akbas et al (2011) and Aytar et al (2011) were well-documented trials, with clearly presented results focussed on PFPS as the presenting condition. Unfortunately, differing control groups (sham taping and exercise/massage respectively) makes overall comparison inconclusive. Chen et al (2008) focussed on biomechanical effects of KT on PFPS sufferers, comparing its effects against sham taping, no taping and asymptomatic healthy participants. Although the results are presented in great detail, a poorly documented methodology, makes this study less meaningful to this review.None of these studies included a power calculation and featured small (n=31, 25, 22) study groups, though small groups can be expected from qualitative research (Aveyard, 2008, p. 100).Table 9: Methodological quality of selected papers investigating efficacy of kinesiotape in treatment of musculoskeletal conditions.StudyKey Strengths/WeaknessesRatingAkbas et al (2011)Strengths:Inclusion/exclusion criteria clear and relevantClear protocol of group allocation & randomisationBlinding of participants and examinersOutcomes measured are relevant & consistentWeaknesses:KT mixed with exercise rather than aloneStudy groups small with no power calculationHigh Aytar et al (2011)Strengths:Inclusion/exclusion criteria clear and relevantBlinding of participants and examinersSham KT identical in design/applicationOutcomes measured are relevant & consistentWeaknesses:Randomisation/allocation method unrecordedStudy groups small with no power calculationHighChen et al (2008)Strengths:Sham KT identical in design/applicationWeaknesses:Inclusion/exclusion criteria undefinedBlinding of participants onlyMix of symptomatic and asymptomatic participantsResults predominantly biomechanicalStudy groups small with no power calculationLowGonzalez-Iglesias et al (2009)Strengths:Sham KT identical in design/applicationBlinding of participants and examinersInclusion/exclusion criteria clear and relevantResults consistent, relevant and clearly presentedWeaknesses:KT used in both groupsRandomisation/allocation method unrecordedResults measured in first 24 hours onlyStudy groups small with no power calculationHighHsu et al (2008)Strengths:Sham KT identical in design/applicationBlinding of participants and examinersInclusion/exclusion criteria clear and relevantWeaknesses:Extremely specific population studiedRandomisation method unclearNo assessment of pain or disabilityStudy groups small with no power calculationModerateKey: KT = Kinesiotaping Table 9 (cont): Methodological quality of selected papers investigating efficacy of kinesiotape in treatment of musculoskeletal conditions.StudyKey Strengths/WeaknessesRatingKaya et al (2010)Strengths:Inclusion/exclusion criteria clearly definedPower calculation recorded and adequate group size recordedResults clearly presentedWeaknesses:KT mixed with exercise rather than aloneAllocation based on date of admission rather than randomised modelExaminer not blindedModeratePaoloni et al (2011)Strengths:Inclusion/exclusion criteria clearly definedEnrolment of subjects and progression of trial very well presentedWeaknesses:Central hypothesis (FR) not commonly accepted as cause of CLBPMixed intervention and assessment protocolStudy groups small with no power calculationNo assessment of speed of improvement, just overall figures at end of trialModerateThelen et al (2008)Strengths:Sham KT designed to blind participants effectivelyBlinding of participants and examinersInclusion/exclusion criteria clearly definedEnrolment of subjects very well presentedRandomisation method clearPower calculation included Weaknesses:Subjects recruited from military academy and all aged 18-24Groups smaller than requiredHighTsai et al (2010)Strengths:Randomisation method clearBlinding of participants and examinersInclusion/exclusion criteria clearly definedTesting method relevant and accurateResults clearly presentedWeaknesses:Study groups small with no power calculationHighKey: KT = Kinesiotaping ; FR = Flexion/Relaxation ; CLBP = Chronic Low Back PainPositive results in pain, soft tissue flexibility (Akbas et al 2001), muscle activation (Chen et al 2008) and strength (Aytar et al 2011) echo findings from trials featuring healthy individuals (Aktas & Baltaci, 2011; S?upik et al 2007; Vithoulkaa et al, 2010), suggesting that KT may be effective in the treatment of PFPS. In treating shoulder impingement (SI) Thelen et al (2008) and Kaya et al (2010) taped in a similar manner (Figure 10a, b) but comparison groups and study duration differed; Thelen at al (2008) compared with sham KT and measured outcomes after weeks one and two, whilst Kaya et al (2010) compared against ultrasound, TENS and heat packs and measured outcomes after day one, three and six. Thelen et al (2008) was the only SI study to include a power calculation but failed to provide enough participants (26 required in each group, 21 provided) to satisfy. Figure 10: Kinesiotaping approaches to shoulder impingement.a) Thelen et al (2008), b) Kaya et al (2010), c) Hsu et al (2009)Hsu et al (2009) featured a taping protocol quite different to the previous two trials (Figure 10c) and was peculiar in that it focussed on a small number (n=17) of baseball players only, a narrow population with specific loads on the shoulder complex.Figure 10 shows how the taping protocols differed and although Thelen at al (2008) and Kaya et al (2010) have similarities, there are still fundamental differences in KT approach, including lack of KT over the mid fibres of trapezius (10a) and KT over the lower fibres of trapezius only in Hsu et al (2009) (10c). As a result, the efficacy of KT in the treatment of shoulder impingement is not clearly identified by these three studies.Paolini et al (2011) addressed chronic lower back pain (CLBP), focusing on “Flexion-Relaxation” (FR) of the lumbar erector spinae. In healthy individuals, muscle activity is reduced after forward flexion whilst in CLBP sufferers it is hypothesised that these same muscles are held in a state of contraction. Featuring a complex model of three intervention groups with testing in two phases, the results are inconclusive for either KT or home exercise, with an immediate positive improvement in FR in 33% of participants being the most significant result.A study of healthy individuals (Yoshida & Kahanov, 2007) found positive results in increased forward flexion immediately after using KT to facilitate lumbar erector spinae. Although no assessment was made of pain and a direct connection between increased range of movement and reduced pain not possible from these results alone, when combined with the results from Paolini et al (2011) there is indication of how KT could be used in CLBP. Guidelines for the treatment of low back pain (Koes et al, 2006; UK BEAM Trial, 2004; NICE, 2009) advise remaining active and maintaining mobility, so KT could be used to increase range of movement and relieve muscle tension.As each of the remaining papers (Gonzalez-Iglesias et al 2009, Tsai et al 2010) looked at different conditions, with no additional studies to compare findings to, firm conclusions are difficult. A unique finding from Tsai et al (2010) was the effect of KT on fascia thickness, as measured by diagnostic ultrasound. Featuring one of the larger overall study groups (n=52), a mean reduction in the thickness of plantar fascia of over 16% at the site of calcaneal attachment was one of the clearest positive outcomes from any the studies. Kinesiotaping as a viable alternative Four of the identified studies (Akbas et al 2011, Kaya et al 2010, Paolini et al 2011, Tsai et al 2010) compared the action of therapeutic KT against manual therapy. Akbas et al (2011) found improvements in soft tissue flexibility appeared faster in the KT group, whilst a faster reduction in pain was noted by Kaya et al (2010), Paolini et al (2011) and Tsai et al (2010. In all studies KT was applied less frequently (typically every 3 days) than alternative treatment (daily in all but Paolini et al 2011, where exercise was three times a week). This suggests that KT achieves results faster than US, TENS or exercise and can be supplied less often with less specialist equipment. Limitations of studies assessing efficacy of kinesiotapeOne of the most important issues affecting the reliability of results from these trials is the manner in which the tape is applied. KT can be applied in a number of ways, at the discretion of the therapist. Although advantageous in the clinical setting, it makes direct comparison of trials difficult as the taping protocol may differ greatly. It is therefore difficult to categorically argue that KT does or does not work for a particular condition, as success or failure is due to the manner in which the tape is applied, as much as the tape itself. Clinical Implications and Relevance to OsteopathyThe proposed mechanism of action of KT, the lifting of the epidermis to reduce compression of tissues and fluid beneath, directly follows one of the key osteopathic principles, the importance of fluid movement in the maintenance of health (Figure 11, #6).The body is a unitStructure and function are reciprocally interrelatedThe body possesses self-regulatory mechanismsThe body has the inherent capacity to defend itself and repair itselfWhen normal adaptability is disrupted, or when environmental changes overcome the body's capacity for self-maintenance, disease may ensueMovement of body fluids is essential to the maintenance of healthThe nerves play a crucial part in controlling the fluids of the bodyThere are somatic components to disease that are not only manifestations of disease but also are factors that contribute to maintenance of the diseased stateFigure 11: Osteopathic Principles (Sammut & Searle-Barnes, 1998)Further to this, the ability of KT to improve muscle firing (Chen et al, 2008, Hsu et al 2009) improve soft tissue flexibility and increase range of movement (Akbas et al 2011, Thelen et al 2008, Gonzalez-Iglesias et al, 2009) suggests that it could be used to help improve the structure and function of the body, better equipping it to promote repair. Figure 12: The effect of chronic postural adaptations on muscle and fascia (Myers, 2007)Future treatment of chronic postural conditions could be influenced by the findings of Tsai et al (2010), which found measurable effects of KT on fascia thickness. Figure 12 shows a chronic, slouched posture commonly observed, the muscles held in a state of constant strain. Myers (2007, p18) describes how collagen fibres are laid down to support these muscles, creating an inelastic, fibrous network. This can be treated with manual therapy, home exercise and postural education but the addition of KT to reduce thickness of this tissue alongside these interventions has great potential for success.The very nature of KT means that application can be adapted for each individual, targeting specific tissues. This is particularly relevant to the osteopathic approach of treating each patient as an individual (DiGiovanna et al, 2005), suggesting it could work effectively alongside soft tissue massage, mobilisation or manipulation.Limitations of this reviewThere were numerous limitations to the design of this review, influenced by resources available and the author’s experience. Due to the nature of this undergraduate study, only one researcher, relatively inexperienced in research methodology, performed all searches, inclusion/exclusion of papers and analysis of selected studies, allowing for individual bias CITATION Kan04 \l 2057 (Kane, 2004). Although a systematic approach was adopted CITATION Ave08 \p 13 \l 2057 (Aveyard, 2008, p. 13) and care taken to search all appropriate databases with relevant search terms, the potential still exists for papers to be missed. No meta-analysis was performed due to heterogeneity of methodology but themes were identified and discussed.To strengthen the quality of this review, a second researcher could be used to ensure that searches are performed and recorded accurately and offer additional opinions relating to study selection and assessment. This additional resource could also aid thorough searching of online databases, grey literature, foreign language studies and relevant journals by hand. ConclusionThis study identified nine randomised controlled trials assessing the efficacy of kinesiotape (KT) in the treatment of musculoskeletal pathology. One study (Tsai et al, 2010) found compelling evidence for the positive effect of KT on fascia thickness whilst four studies (Akbas et al 2011, Kaya et al 2010, Paolini et al 2011, Tsai et al 2010) found KT to be as effective as ultrasound, TENS and home exercise in improving pain and disability, when applied three times less frequently. Five papers (Akbas et al 2011, Kaya et al 2010, Thelan et al 2008, Paolini et al 2011, Tsai et al 2010) identified that KT provided faster improvements in pain and flexibility than control groups, although final outcomes were similar in all but one (Akbas et al 2011).Studies investigating effect on shoulder impingement and patello-femoral pain, found some positive results but heterogeneity of methodology makes it difficult to categorically confirm efficacy. Further research with consistent methodology is required.The identified positive effects of KT on soft tissue flexibility, fascia thickness, pain and disability indicate that KT can and should be used by osteopaths to treat both acute and chronic musculoskeletal presentations.Opportunities for future researchThe application of the tape is as important as the tape itself, so future studies should follow standard taping protocols and measure homogeneous outcomes to ensure that results can be combined and conclusions drawn. At present no such protocols exist, so this would need to be established before additional studies undertaken.Future studies should aim to improve methodological quality and provide larger sample sizes, at least large enough to satisfy power-calculated amounts.ReferencesAkbas, E., Atay, A., & Yuksel, I. (2011). The effects of additional kinesio taping over exercise in the treatment of patellofemoral pain syndrome. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc , 45 (5), 335-341.Aktas, G., & Baltaci, G. (2011). Does kinesiotaping increase knee muscles strength and functional performance? Isokinetics and Exercise Science , 19, p149-155.Aveyard, H. (2008). Doing a literature review in health and social care (1st Ed.). Maidenhead: Open University Press.Aytar, A., Ozunlu, N., Surenkok, O., Baltaci, G., Oztop, P., & Karatas, M. (2011). Initial effects of kinesio taping in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome: A randomised, double-blind study. Isokinetics and Exercise Science , 19, 135-142.Chang, H., Chou, K., Lin, J., Lin, C., & Wang, C. (2010). Immediate effect of forearm Kinesio taping on maximal grip strength and force sense in healthy collegiate athletes. Physical Therapy in Sport , 11, 122-127.Chen, P., Hong, W., Lin, C., & Chen, W. (2008). Biomechanics Effects of Kinesio Taping for Persons with Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome During Stair Climbing. Biomed , Proceedings 21, 395-397.DiGiovanna, E., Schiowitz, S., & Dowling, D. (2005). An Osteopathic Approach to Diagnosis and Treatment. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins.NICE (2009, May 27). Early management of persistent non-specific low back pain. Retrieved Mar 10, 2012 from NICE: , B., Dingley, P., Davies, E., Lewis, J., & Alexander, C. (2010). The effect of kinesiotape on function, pain, and motoneuronal excitability in healthy people and people with Achilles tendinopathy. Clin J Sport Med , 20 (6), 416-421.Fu, T., Wong, A., Pei, Y., Wu, K., Chou, S., & YC, L. (2008). Effect of Kinesio taping on muscle strength in athletes - A pilot study. Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport , 11, 198-201.Gonzalez-Iglesias, J., Fernandez-De-Las-Penas, C., Cleland, J., Huijbregts, P., & Del Rosario Gutierrez-Vega, M. (2009). Short-Term Effects of Cervical Kinesio Taping on Pain and Cervical range of Motion in Patients With Acute Whiplash Injury: A Randomized Clinical Trial. J Orthop SPorts Phys Ther , 39 (7), 515-521.Halseth, T., McChesney, J., DeBeliso, M., Vaughan, R., & Lien, J. (2004). The effect of Kinesio Taping on proprioception at the ankle. Journal of Sports Science and Medicine , 3, 1-7.Hartman, L. (2001). Handbook of Osteopathic Technique (3rd ed.). Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes.Hombrados-Hernándeza, R., Segura-Ortía, E., & Buil-Bellverb, M. A. (2011). Effects of the application of kinesio taping on the diaphragm on the cycloergospirometic test outcome and 6?minute walk test. Fisioterapia , 33 (2), p64-69.Hsu, Y., Chen, W., Lin, H., Wang, W., & Shih, Y. (2009). The effects of taping on scapular kinematics and muscle performance in baseball players with shoulder impingement syndrome. Journal of Electromyography and Kinesiology , 19, 1092-1099.Huang, C., Hsieh, T., Lu, S., & Su, F. (2011). Effect of the Kinesio tape to muscle activity and vertical jump performance in healthy inactive people. Biomed Eng Online , 11 (10), 70.Kase, K., Wallis, J., & Kase, T. (2003). Clinical Therapeutic Applications of the Kinesio Taping Method. (2nd, Ed.) Albuquerque: Kinesio Taping Association International.Kaya, E., Zinnuroglu, M., & Tugcu, I. (2010). Kinesio taping compared to physical therapy modalities for the treatment of shoulder impingement syndrome. Clin Rheumatol , 30 (2), 201-207.Kinesio UK. (2011). Kinesio UK - History. Retrieved 01 15, 2012 from , B., Van Tulder, M., & Thomas, S. (2006). Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain. BMJ , 332, 1430-1434.Konin, J. (2010). Clinical Roundtable: Kinesiotaping. Athletic Training & Sports Health Care , 2 (6), 258-259.Lee, J., Yoo, W., & Hwang-Bo, G. (2011). The Immediate Effect of Anterior Pelvic Tilt Taping on Pelvic Inclination. J Phys Ther Sci , 23, 201-203.Lee, J.-H., Yoo, W.-G., & Lee, K.-S. (2010). Effects of Head-neck Rotation and Kinesio Taping of the Flexor Muscles on Dominant-hand Grip Strength. J Phys Ther Sci , 22, p285-289.Lee, M., Lee, C., Park, J., Lee, S., Jeong, T., Son, G., et al. (2011). Influence of Kinesio Taping on the Motor Neuron Conduction Velocity. J Phys Ther Sci , 23, 313-315.Levangie, P., & Norkin, C. (2001). Joint Structure and Function: A Comprehensive Analysis (3rd ed.). Philadelphia: FA Davis Company.Lou, M.-Y. (2008). Effects of Kinesio and Traditional Tape on Motor Perception and Basic Soccer Skills. Br J Sports Med , 42, p491-548.Lowes, D. (2008, August 28). Kinesio has it taped. Athletics Weekly , p39.Myers, T. (2007). Anatomy Trains: Myofascial Meridians for Manual and Movement Therapists. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone.O'Sullivan, D., & Bird, S. (2011). Utilization of Kinesio Taping for Fascia Unloading. International Journal of Athletic Therapy & Training , 16 (4), p21-27.Paoloni, M., Bernetti, A., Fratocchi, G., Mangone, M., Parrinello, L., Del Pilar Cooper, M., et al. (2011). Kinesio Taping applied to lumbar muscles influences clinical and electromyographic characteristics in chronic low back pain patients. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med , 47, 237-244.S?upik, A., Dwornik, M., Bia?oszewski, D., & Zych, E. (2007). Effect of Kinesio Taping on bioelectrical activity of vastus medialis muscle. Preliminary report. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil , 9 (6), 644-51.Sammut, E., & Searle-Barnes, P. (1998). Osteopathic Diagnosis. Cheltenham: Stanley Thornes.Slater, L. (2012, February 3). Operations Manager, Kinesio UK. Newcastle Upon Tyne, Northumberland, UK.Soylu, A., Irmak, R., & Baltaci, G. (2011). Acute effects of kinesiotaping on muscular endurance and fatigue by using surface electromyography signals of masseter muscle. Med Sport , 15 (1), 13-16.Thelen, M., Dauber, J., & Stoneman, P. (2008). The Clinical Efficacy of Kinesio Tape for Shoulder Pain: A Randomized Double-blinded, Clinical Trial. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther , 38 (7), 389-395.Hitech Therapy (2012). KinesioTex Info. Retrieved Mar 10, 2012 from Hitech Therapy: BEAM Trial. (2004). United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomised trial: cost effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care. BMJ , 11, 329-337.Tsai, C., Chang, W., & Lee, J. (2010). Effects of Short-term Treatment with Kinesiotaping for Plantar Fasciitis. J Musculoskeletal Pain , 18 (1), 71-80.Vithoulkaa, I., Beneka, A., Mallioub, P., Aggelousis, N., Karatsolisa, K., & Diamantopoulos, K. (2010). The effects of Kinesio-Taping on quadriceps strength during isokinetic exercise in healthy non athlete women. Isokinetics and Exercise Science , 18, p1-6.Wintle, A. (2012, January 29). How 'Beckham tape' can help beat headaches. Mail on Sunday: Review , p. p31.Yoshida, A., & Kahanov, L. (2007, May). Kinesio Taping Part 1: An Overview of Its Use in Athletes. Athletic Therapy Today , p17-18.Yoshida, A., & Kahanov, L. (2007). The Effect of Kinesio Taping on Lower Trunk Range of Motions. Research in Sports Medicine , 15, p103-112. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download