María Bravo Aguilar1, Javier Abián-Vicén1, Jill Halstead2, Gabriel Gijon-Nogueron3. 1. Camilo José Cela University, Exercise Physiology Laboratory, Spain. 2. Section of Clinical Biomechanics and Physical Medicine, Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, UK. 3. Department of Nursing and Podiatry, University of Málaga, Spain. Electronic address: gagijon@uma.es.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect kinesiotaping (KT) versus sham kinesiotaping (sham KT) in the repositioning of pronated feet after a short running. DESIGN: Prospective, randomised, double-blinded, using a repeated-measures design with no cross-over. METHODS:116 amateur runners were screened by assessing the post-run (45min duration) foot posture to identify pronated foot types (defined by Foot Posture Index [FPI] score of ≥6). Seventy-three runners met the inclusion criteria and were allocated into two treatment groups, KT (n=49) and sham KT (n=24). After applying either the KT or sham KT and completing 45min of running (mean speed of 12km/h), outcome measures were collected (FPI and walking Pedobarography). RESULTS:FPI was reduced in both groups, more so in the KT group (mean FPI between group difference=0.9, CI 0.1-1.9), with a score closer to neutral. There were statistically significant differences between KT and sham KT (p<.05 and p<.01) in pressure time integral, suggesting that sham KT had a greater effect. CONCLUSIONS:KT may be of some assistant to clinicians in correction of pronated foot posture in a short-term. There was no effect of KT, however on pressure variables at heel strike or toe-off following a short duration of running, the sham KT technique had a greater effect. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 1b.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: To determine the effect kinesiotaping (KT) versus sham kinesiotaping (sham KT) in the repositioning of pronated feet after a short running. DESIGN: Prospective, randomised, double-blinded, using a repeated-measures design with no cross-over. METHODS: 116 amateur runners were screened by assessing the post-run (45min duration) foot posture to identify pronated foot types (defined by Foot Posture Index [FPI] score of ≥6). Seventy-three runners met the inclusion criteria and were allocated into two treatment groups, KT (n=49) and sham KT (n=24). After applying either the KT or sham KT and completing 45min of running (mean speed of 12km/h), outcome measures were collected (FPI and walking Pedobarography). RESULTS: FPI was reduced in both groups, more so in the KT group (mean FPI between group difference=0.9, CI 0.1-1.9), with a score closer to neutral. There were statistically significant differences between KT and sham KT (p<.05 and p<.01) in pressure time integral, suggesting that sham KT had a greater effect. CONCLUSIONS: KT may be of some assistant to clinicians in correction of pronated foot posture in a short-term. There was no effect of KT, however on pressure variables at heel strike or toe-off following a short duration of running, the sham KT technique had a greater effect. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapy, level 1b.
Authors: AmirAli Jafarnezhadgero; Amir Fatollahi; Ali Sheykholeslami; Valdeci Carlos Dionisio; Mohammad Akrami Journal: Biomed Eng Online Date: 2021-11-27 Impact factor: 2.819