Evaluating the effects of two different kinesiology taping techniques on shoulder pain and function in patients with hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (EDS) is a group of inherited connective tissue disorders which predominantly affects women and has a prevalence as high as 1 in 5,000 individuals. Hypermobile EDS (hEDS) is the most common subtype of EDS and is characterized by multi-joint pain, particularly in large joints such as the shoulder. Physical therapy is often utilized to address the pain, physical impairments, and functional loss in patients with EDS. Kinesiology Tape (KT) is an intervention commonly used by physical therapists for treating shoulder pain and dysfunction. Studies related to the effectiveness of KT in patients with shoulder pain is equivocal and there are a lack of studies specifically studying the effects of KT in an EDS population. Purpose The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy and short-term effects of two different KT techniques on shoulder pain and function in individuals with hEDS and shoulder pain. Methods Participants were recruited from EDS support groups in the New England area of the United States; were diagnosed with hEDS by their physician; and had shoulder pain. Baseline demographic information was obtained for each participant followed by completion of 4 patient reported outcome (PRO) measures: the Upper Extremity Functional Index, QuickDASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, & Hand), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index. Current pain level, average pain over the past 24 h, and worst pain over the past 24 h were recorded using the numeric pain rating scale (NPRS). Subjects were randomly assigned to receive either an experimental shoulder KT procedure or a control shoulder taping. Immediately after taping, the NPRS was reassessed. Subjects then returned 48 h later to repeat the NPRS and PRO measures. Results There was no significant difference between the experimental and control tape groups for any outcome measure. There was a significant improvement from pre-taping to 48-hours post taping for each of the 4 PRO measures with large effect sizes (p < 0.001; ƞp2 = .517–.719). Likewise, average, and worst pain over the last 24 h significantly improved with large effect sizes over the same period (p = 0.005; ƞp2 = .225 and p < 0.001; ƞp2 = .382, respectively). Current NPRS levels significantly improved from pre-tape to immediately post-tape (p = .023, ƞp2 = .131) and was maintained through the 48-hour follow up, although no further improvement was seen. Conclusion KT is an inexpensive and relatively safe intervention that is easy to apply and can offer temporary improvements in pain and function for patients with EDS and shoulder pain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".