Effects of kinesiotaping added to a rehabilitation programme for patients with rotator cuff tendinopathy: protocol for a single-blind, randomised controlled trial addressing symptoms, functional limitations and underlying deficits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Rotator cuff tendinopathy (RCTe) is the most frequent cause of shoulder pain, resulting in considerable losses to society and public resources. Muscle imbalance and inadequate sensorimotor control are deficits often associated with RCTe. Kinesiotaping (KT) is widely used by clinicians for rehabilitation of RCTe. While previous studies have examined the immediate effects of KT on shoulder injuries or the effects of KT as an isolated method of treatment, no published study has addressed its mid-term and long-term effects when combined with a rehabilitation programme for patients with RCTe. The primary objective of this randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be to assess the efficacy of therapeutic KT, added to a rehabilitation programme, in reducing pain and disabilities in individuals with RCTe. Secondary objectives will look at the effects of KT on the underlying factors involved in shoulder control, such as muscular activity, acromiohumeral distance (AHD) and range of motion (ROM). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A single-blind RCT will be conducted. Fifty-two participants, randomly allocated to one of two groups (KT or no-KT), will take part in a 6-week rehabilitation programme. The KT group will receive KT added to the rehabilitation programme, whereas the no-KT group will receive only the rehabilitation programme. Measurements will be taken at baseline, week 3, week 6, week 12 and 6 months. Primary outcomes will be symptoms and functional limitations assessed by the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire. Secondary outcomes will include shoulder ROM, AHD at rest and at 60° of abduction, and muscle activation during arm elevation. The added effects of KT will be assessed through a two-way analysis of variance for repeated measures. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Quebec Rehabilitation Institute of the Centre Integrated University Health and Social Services. Results will be disseminated through international publications in peer-reviewed journals, in addition to international conference presentations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Protocol was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02881021) on 25 August 2016. The WHO Trial Registration Data Set can also be found as an online supplementary file.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.042 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.060 | 0.013 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".