| Literature DB >> 27190430 |
Gülcan Öztürk1, Duygu Geler Külcü2, Nilgün Mesci2, Ayşe Duygu Şilte3, Ece Aydog4.
Abstract
[Purpose] The purpose of this study was to determine the short- and mid-term effects of Kinesio taping on the trapezius muscle in individuals with myofascial pain syndrome.Entities:
Keywords: Myofascial pain syndrome; Taping; Trapezius
Year: 2016 PMID: 27190430 PMCID: PMC4868190 DOI: 10.1589/jpts.28.1074
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Phys Ther Sci ISSN: 0915-5287
Fig. 1.Flow diagram of the patients
Fig. 2.a. The inhibition application technique in a suitable position. b. The placebo application technique in a neutral position
Demographic characteristics
| KINESIOTAPE (n=20) | SHAM(n=17) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 29.95±4.90 | 33.86±8.47 | |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 22.71±3.02 | 22.4±4.60 | |
| Duration (days) | 329±221.19 (365) | 532±388.38 (455) | |
| Gender (female/male) | 3 (%17.7) | 14 (%82.3) | 14 (%82.3) |
| 2 (%10) | 3 (%17.7) | 3 (%17.7) | |
Comparison of VAS, algometry and trapezius muscle strength within the groups, between the groups
| Group | Pre-treatment (T1) | Post-treatment (T2) | Follow-up (T3) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VAS | 1 | 6.86± 1.87 (7.5)** | 3.86± 2.60 (3.5)* | 2.64± 3.25 (0.0)***†† |
| 2 | 6.45± 1.19 (6.5)** | 3.05± 2.58 (3.0)* | 2.60± 2.82 (2.0) | |
| Algometry (kg/cm2) | 1 | 3.85± 2.62 (4.0)** | 6.00± 3.61 (7.0)* | 6.85± 3.68 (7.0)***†† |
| 2 | 4.93± 2.53 (5.0)** | 5.93± 2.87 (6.5)* | 6.29± 3.20 (6.5) | |
| M. trapezius elevation strength | 1 | 62.25± 9.24 (90.0)** | 65.25± 10.70 (105.0)*† | 134.50± 79.70 (105.0) |
| 2 | 130.71± 99.73 (120.0) | 134.29± 105.23 (115.0) | 137.86± 100.47 (115.0) |
Post hoc analysis: *Statistically significant comparison between pre- and postresults (p < 0.05) **Statistically significant comparison between pre- and follow-up results (p < 0.05) ***Statistically significant comparison between post- and follow-up results (p < 0.05). Between-group comparisons: † Statistically significant difference between pre- and postresults of mean change scores (p < 0.05). †† Statistically significant difference between post- and follow-up results of mean change scores (p < 0.05)