MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Effects of Kinesio Taping on Pain and Function in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis

2016· article· en· W2500649819 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anna Lina Rahlf, Astrid Zech

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteoarthritisWOMACMedicinePhysical therapyPlaceboRange of motionIsometric exerciseBalance (ability)Knee painGaitPhysical medicine and rehabilitationManual therapyRandomized controlled trialInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Knee osteoarthritis is one of the most frequent musculoskeletal disorders of elderly people (Woolf & Pfleger, 2003). The majority of patients suffers from pain and functional joint impairments. A therapeutic approach that has gained increasing attention among physicians and therapists is the treatment with kinesio taping. However, knowledge on the effectiveness of kinesio tape is limited and study results are inconsistent (Morris et al. 2013; William et al., 2012). The objective of this study was to determine the effects of kinesio taping on pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: 141 Patients (65.1±7 yrs) with a clinical and radiographic diagnosis of knee osteoarthritis were randomized into a kinesio group, placebo group or control group. Participants completed a baseline test and a post tests after receiving the tape and wearing it for three consecutive days. Primary outcomes were perceptions on pain, stiffness and physical function (Western Ontario and Mac Master Universities Osteoarthritis Index = WOMAC). Secondary outcomes were balance (Balance Error Scoring System = BESS), gait speed (10 meters walking test = 10MWT), maximum isometric quadriceps strength and knee range of motion (ROM). Differences between the groups were analyzed using ANCOVA on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: At baseline, there were no statistically significant differences between groups. Significant effects were found for the tape group in WOMAC pain (tape vs. placebo p=0.053; tape vs. control p=0.047), stiffness (tape vs. placebo p=0.012; tape vs. control p≤0.001) and physical function (tape vs. placebo p=0.034; tape vs. control p=0.004). No significant effects were found for the BESS-Test, strength, 10MWT or active ROM. CONCLUSION: The results showed, that wearing a kinesio tape has a positive effect on patient’s perception regarding pain, stiffness and function. No improvements were found in functional balance, maximum isometric quadriceps strength, gait speed or active range of motion.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicOsteoarthritis Treatment and Mechanisms→French-language works237,207→