Effect of different Kinesio tape tensions on experimentally-induced thermal and muscle pain in healthy adults.

Athletes and rehabilitation specialists have used Kinesio tape (KT) to help alleviate pain symptoms. Currently, no clear mechanism exists as to why pain is relieved with the use of KT and whether the pain relieving effect is simply a placebo effect. Additionally, the most effective taping parameters (tension of tape) for pain reduction remain unknown. We used quantitative sensory testing to address these key gaps in the KT and pain literature. Using a repeated-measures laboratory design, we examined whether KT applied at different tensions reduces experimentally-induced pain compared to a no tape condition and KT with minimal tension. Heat pain thresholds (HPT's), pressure pain thresholds (PPT's), and pressure pain suprathreshold (PPS: 125% of PPT) tests were administered to the forearm prior to and during KT and no tape conditions. Tape was applied to the ventral forearm at 25% of max tension, 75% of max tension, and no tension (placebo). Repeated measures ANOVA's evaluated the pain outcomes between conditions and across time. KT had no significant effect on PPT's and HPT's (p's >0.05). The ANOVA on PPS revealed that KT applied at 25% of tension significantly reduced pain ratings from the pretest (M = 34.4, SE = 5.5) to post-test 1 (M = 30.3, SE = 4.7) and post-test 2 (M = 30.4, SE = 4.7). No other conditions significantly reduced suprathreshold pressure pain. However, pain ratings at posttest-1 during the no-tape condition (M = 36.4, SE = 5.3) were significantly greater than pain ratings during post-test 1 and post-test 2 of all three tape conditions. In conclusion, the current study revealed that KT applied at low tension is the optimal tension to reduce pressure-evoked muscle pain. Additionally, the results suggested that KT applied at low, high, or no tension may acutely prevent increased muscle sensitivity with repeated pressure stimulation.

Effectiveness of Kinesio Taping in Patients With Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review With Meta-analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of Kinesio Taping (KT) in patients with nonspecific low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: KT is widely used in patients with low back pain. METHODS: We conducted searches on PubMed, EMBASE, PEDro, SciELO, and LILACS up to February 26, 2018. We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with chronic nonspecific low back pain that compared KT to no intervention or placebo as well as RCTs that compared KT combined with exercise against exercise alone. The methodological quality and statistical reporting of the eligible trials were measured by the 11-item PEDro scale. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE classification. We considered pain intensity and disability as the primary outcomes. Whenever possible, the data were pooled through meta-analysis. RESULTS: We identified 11 RCTs for this systematic review (pooled n = 743). Two clinical trials (pooled n = 100) compared KT to no intervention at the short-term follow-up. Four studies compared KT to placebo (pooled n = 287) at short-term follow-up and two trials (pooled n = 100) compared KT to placebo at intermediate-term follow-up. Five trials (pooled n = 296) compared KT combined with exercises or electrotherapy to exercises or spinal manipulation alone. No statistically significant difference was found for most comparisons. CONCLUSION: Very low to moderate quality evidence shows that KT was no better than any other intervention for most the outcomes assessed in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. We found no evidence to support the use of KT in clinical practice for patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 1.

Arthroscopic knotless anterior labral stabilization using labral tape and wide awake anaesthesia-short term results.

BACKGROUND: The shoulder is the least constrained of all joints of the body and is more susceptible to injury including dislocation. The rate of recurrent instability following primary stabilization procedure at 10 years of follow-up ranged from 3.4 to 20%. There is a lack of evidence in the literature regarding use of labral tape and anchors for anterior stabilization despite the growing market for this product. We describe the outcomes of 67 patients who underwent knotless arthroscopic anterior stabilisation under awake anaesthesia using 1.5 mm LabralTape with 2.9 mm Pushlock anchors for primary anterior instability by a single surgeon. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected outcome data for adult patients undergoing anterior stabilisation for primary traumatic anterior shoulder instability between 2013 and 2016 at two centres. Patients with > 25% glenoid bone loss, engaging Hill Sach's, and multidirectional instability were excluded. All cases underwent surgery using awake anaesthetic technique. The surgical technique and post-operative physiotherapy was standardized. Outcomes were measured at 6 months and 12 months. RESULTS: Of the 74 patients in our study, 7 were lost to follow up. Outcomes were measured using the Oxford Instability Shoulder Score (OISS) and clinical assessment including the range of motion. The OISS showed statistically significant improvement from a mean score and standard deviation (SD) of 24.72 ± 2.8 pre-surgery to 43.09 ± 3.5 after the procedure at 12 months with good to excellent outcomes in 66 cases (98.5%). The mean abduction was 134.2 ± 6.32 and external rotation was 72.55 ± 5.42 at 60-90 position at 12 months. We report no failures due to knot slippage or anchor pull-out. CONCLUSION: Our case series using the above technique has distinct advantages of combining a small non-absorbable implant with flat, braided, and high-strength polyethylene tape. This technique demonstrates superior medium term results to conventional suture knot techniques for labral stabilization thereby validating its use.