Effects of Kinesio Tape on Vascularity, Pliability, and Height of the Hypertrophic Scar in Burns Patients: A Randomized Pilot Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deep burns damage the reticular dermis and may lead to the formation of hypertrophic scars. Compression therapy reduces local vascularity and realigns collagen fibers, resulting in esthetic and functional improvements. This study evaluated the effect of Kinesio tape compression with maximum mechanical tension on vascularity, pliability, and the height of hypertrophic scars following deep burns. A single-blind, randomized pilot clinical trial was carried out. The elastic compression of Kinesio tape was applied at maximum stretch in the intervention group (n = 11) and no stretch in the sham group (n = 11). Vascularity, pliability, and height (the primary outcomes) were evaluated at 0, 45, and 90 days using the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). The association between the VSS scores, the intervention and the evaluation moment were analyzed using linear mixed-effects regression models, while comparisons of means between the groups were performed using the Student's t-test. Significance was set at 5%. The mean VSS scores were similar between the groups. Significant improvement occurred in both groups when posttreatment and baseline scores were compared. No further improvement was found in the vascularity, pliability, or height of hypertrophic scars resulting from deep burns when an elastic compression of Kinesio tape was used at maximum tension compared to lesser mechanical tension.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".