| Literature DB >> 30651946 |
Lin Yang1, Jingyi Yang1, Chengqi He1.
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of the study was to explore the effect of kinesiology taping on hemiplegic shoulder pain (HSP) in terms of pain intensity, magnitude of subluxation, muscle activity, and active range of motion (AROM). Design: Double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. Setting: the Rehabilitation Center of the West China Hospital. Participants: Nineteen individuals suffering from HSP were recruited in this study. Intervention: Patients were randomly assigned into the taping group or control group. The taping group received therapeutic kinesiology taping and conventional treatment, while the control group received placebo taping (applied without tension) and conventional treatment. Main Outcome Measures: The shoulder pain intensity (numerical pain rating scale), magnitude of subluxation, muscle activity (measured by surface electromyography (sEMG)), and shoulder active range of movement (AROM) were assessed at the baseline, on the first day (immediately after taping) and 4 weeks after treatment (without taping).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30651946 PMCID: PMC6311752 DOI: 10.1155/2018/8346432
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1Kinesiology taping for patients. (1) supraspinatus; (2) middle part of deltoid; (3) teres minor; (4) anterior and posterior part of deltoid.
Baseline characters of patients in the two groups.
| Taping group | Control group |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number | 10 | 9 | |
| Age (years) | 59 (3.2) | 60 (2.3) | 0.939 |
| Male : female | 7 : 3 | 6 : 3 | 0.875 |
| Left : right (hemiplegia) | 4 : 6 | 5 : 4 | 0.498 |
| Time poststroke (weeks) | 18.3 (0.82) | 19.2 (2.49) | 0.502 |
| Pain | 4.3 (1.2) | 5.0 (0.7) | 0.111 |
| Subluxation (cm) | 1.22 (0.39) | 1.18 (0.33) | 0.807 |
| ROM (F) (degrees) | 27.8 (6.1) | 31.7 (7.6) | 0.238 |
| ROM (Abd.) (degrees) | 24.8 (5.5) | 25.6 (6.8) | 0.763 |
| AEMG (S) ( | 152.6 (27.9) | 163.3 (33.1) | 0.925 |
| AEMG (D) ( | 126.8 (11.5) | 134.6 (10.4) | 0.482 |
Note. F = flexion; Abd. = abduction; S = supraspinatus muscle; D = deltoid muscle.
Pain intensity assessed at different time points.
|
| Baseline | First day | 4 weeks later | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Taping group | 10 | 4.3 (1.2) | 0.6 (0.6) | 1.4 (0.7) |
| Placebo group | 9 | 5.0 (0.7) | 4.8 (0.8) | 3.4 (0.8) |
|
| 0.111 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Independent samples t-test, compared between groups, p < 0.05; paired sample t-test, compared between before and after treatment, p < 0.05.
Magnitude of subluxation (cm) of the shoulder.
| Baseline | First day | 4 weeks later | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Taping group | 1.22 (0.39) | 0.71(0.20) | 0.91 (0.31) |
| Control group | 1.18 (0.33) | 1.18 (0.31) | 1.18 (0.26) |
|
| 0.807 | 0.01 | 0.062 |
Independent samples t-test, compared between the taping group and the control group, p < 0.05; paired sample t-test, compared between before and after treatment, p < 0.05.
The AEMG (μV) tested at different time points.
| Group | Muscles | AEMG ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | First day | 4 weeks later | ||
| Taping group | Deltoid | 126.8 (11.5) | 140.0 (13.9) | 221.6 (34.7) |
| Supraspinatus | 152.6 (27.9) | 177.0 (33.1) | 273.3(37.7) | |
|
| ||||
| Control group | Deltoid | 134.6 (10.4) | 135.7 (12.9) | 167.78 (10.2) |
| Supraspinatus | 163.3 (33.1) | 161.3 (35.6) | 198.1 (33.7) | |
Independent samples t-test, compared between the taping group and the control group, p < 0.05; paired sample t-test, compared between before and after treatment, p < 0.05.
The AROM of the shoulder (degree) assessed at different time points.
| Group | Baseline | First day | 4 weeks later | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Taping group | Flexion | 27.8 (6.1) | 28.8 (6.2) | 40.1 (6.8) |
| Abduction | 24.8 (5.5) | 26.7 (5.4) | 33.4 (5.1) | |
|
| ||||
| Control group | Flexion | 31.7 (7.7) | 31.7 (7.7) | 37.9 (9.6) |
| Abduction | 25.6 (6.8) | 26.0 (6.9) | 29.8 (9.2) | |
Independent samples t-test, compared between the taping group and the control group, p < 0.05; paired sample t-test, compared between before and after treatment, p < 0.05.