| Literature DB >> 26311931 |
Yi-Hung Ho1, Cheng-Feng Lin2, Chih-Han Chang1, Hong-Wen Wu3.
Abstract
[Purpose] Limited research has been performed in spite of biomechanical evaluation of jump landing with kinesio taping. Therefore, the main objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of kinesio taping applied to athletes. In this study, the authors wished to investigate the effect of kinesio taping during a vertical jump with run-up and countermovement jump on ankle functional instability.Entities:
Keywords: Ankle functional instability; Kinesio taping
Year: 2015 PMID: 26311931 PMCID: PMC4540823 DOI: 10.1589/jpts.27.2087
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Phys Ther Sci ISSN: 0915-5287
Fig. 1.Kinesio Taping Procedures
The first (NF1) and second (NF2) peak vertical ground reaction forces normalized by each subject’s body weight
| Unit = N/Kg | Countermovement Jump | Vertical jump with run-up | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NF1 | NF2 | NF1 | NF2 | |
| Non-taped | 1.56±0.23 | 4.03±0.76 | 1.72±0.51 | 5.31±1.00 |
| Taped | 1.37±0.18 | 3.64±0.68 | 1.75±0.49 | 4.55±0.72 |
| Significance | # | |||
#Significant difference with and without taping (p<0.05)
The peak moment of ankle plantar flexion
| Unit = Nm/kg | Countermovement | Vertical jump | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Non-taped | 0.09±0.04 | 0.17±0.06 | * |
| Taped | 0.06±0.02 | 0.12±0.05 | |
| Significance | # | # |
#Significant difference with and without taping (p<0.05). *Significant difference between tasks (p<0.05)
The times to the first (T1) and second (T2) peak vertical ground reaction forces after landing
| Unit = ms | Countermovement jump | Vertical jump with run-up | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T1 | T2 | T1 | T2 | |
| Non-taped | 11.36±2.91 | 62.77±8.34 | 10.41±3.89 | 53.01±15.75 |
| Taped | 13.29±3.60 | 66.82±6.97 | 10.63±3.59 | 53.05±13.8 |