Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Bursa Military Hospital, Bursa, Turkey.
Clin Rheumatol. 2011 Feb;30(2):201-7. doi: 10.1007/s10067-010-1475-6. Epub 2010 Apr 30.
The purpose of this study was to determine and compare the efficacy of kinesio tape and physical therapy modalities in patients with shoulder impingement syndrome. Patients (n = 55) were treated with kinesio tape (n = 30) three times by intervals of 3 days or a daily program of local modalities (n = 25) for 2 weeks. Response to treatment was evaluated with the Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scale. Patients were questioned for the night pain, daily pain, and pain with motion. Outcome measures except for the Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scale were assessed at baseline, first, and second weeks of the treatment. Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scale was evaluated only before and after the treatment. Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scale and visual analog scale scores decreased significantly in both treatment groups as compared with the baseline levels. The rest, night, and movement median pain scores of the kinesio taping (20, 40, and 50, respectively) group were statistically significantly lower (p values were 0.001, 0.01, and 0.001, respectively) at the first week examination as compared with the physical therapy group (50, 70, and 70, respectively). However, there was no significant difference in the same parameters between two groups at the second week (0.109, 0.07, and 0.218 for rest, night, and movement median pain scores, respectively). Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scale scores of the kinesio taping group were significantly lower at the second week as compared with the physical therapy group. No side effects were observed. Kinesio tape has been found to be more effective than the local modalities at the first week and was similarly effective at the second week of the treatment. Kinesio taping may be an alternative treatment option in the treatment of shoulder impingement syndrome especially when an immediate effect is needed.
本研究旨在确定并比较肌内效贴布和物理治疗模式在肩峰下撞击综合征患者中的疗效。将 55 例患者(n=55)分为肌内效贴布组(n=30),3 天治疗 3 次,或局部模式组(n=25),每天治疗 2 周。采用手臂、肩和手残疾量表(DASH)评估治疗反应。患者被问及夜间疼痛、日常疼痛和运动时疼痛。除 DASH 外,其他结果测量指标在基线、治疗第 1 周和第 2 周进行评估。仅在治疗前后评估 DASH。与基线水平相比,两组治疗后 DASH 和视觉模拟量表评分均显著降低。肌内效贴布组(20、40 和 50)的休息、夜间和运动时的中位数疼痛评分在第 1 周检查时显著低于物理治疗组(50、70 和 70)(p 值分别为 0.001、0.01 和 0.001)。然而,两组在第 2 周时在相同参数之间没有差异(休息、夜间和运动时的中位数疼痛评分分别为 0.109、0.07 和 0.218)。与物理治疗组相比,肌内效贴布组在第 2 周时 DASH 评分显著降低。未观察到任何副作用。肌内效贴布在第 1 周比局部模式更有效,在治疗第 2 周时效果相当。肌内效贴布可能是肩峰下撞击综合征治疗的另一种选择,特别是在需要即刻效果时。