Luque-Suarez Alejandro, Gijon-Nogueron Gabriel, Baron-Lopez Francisco Javier, Labajos-Manzanares Maria Teresa, Hush Julia, Hancock Mark Jonathan
Physiotherapy Department, University of Malaga, Malaga, Spain.
Nursing and Podiatry Department, University of Malaga, Malaga, Spain.
Physiotherapy. 2014 Mar;100(1):36-40. doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2013.04.005. Epub 2013 Aug 23.
To investigate whether kinesiotaping improves excessive foot pronation compared with sham kinesiotaping.
Quasi-randomised, double-blind study.
One primary care centre.
One hundred and thirty participants were screened for inclusion. Sixty-eight participants with pronated feet [Foot Posture Index (FPI)≥ 6] were enrolled, and the follow-up rate was 100%.
Participants were allocated into one of two groups: an experimental kinesiotaping group (KT1) and a sham taping group (KT2). Measures were collected by a blinded assessor at baseline, and 1 minute, 10 minutes, 60 minutes and 24 hours after taping.
The primary outcome was total FPI score, and the secondary outcome was rear-foot FPI score.
There were no significant differences in total FPI score between kinesiotaping and sham taping at any time point. Similarly, there were no significant differences in rear-foot FPI score, apart from at 60-minute follow-up when the difference between groups was significant (P=0.04) but the effect size was very small (0.85 points on the rear-foot FPI score between -6 and +6).
Kinesiotaping does not correct foot pronation compared with sham kinesiotaping in people with pronated feet.
探讨与假肌内效贴相比，肌内效贴是否能改善足过度内旋。
半随机双盲研究。
一个初级保健中心。
筛选了130名参与者以纳入研究。招募了68名足内旋者[足姿势指数（FPI）≥6]，随访率为100%。
参与者被分为两组之一：实验组（KT1）和假贴扎组（KT2）。由一名盲法评估者在基线、贴扎后1分钟、10分钟、60分钟和24小时收集测量数据。
主要观察指标为FPI总分，次要观察指标为后足FPI评分。
在任何时间点，肌内效贴组和假贴扎组的FPI总分均无显著差异。同样，后足FPI评分也无显著差异，但在60分钟随访时，两组之间存在显著差异（P = 0.04），但效应量非常小（后足FPI评分差异为 -6至+6之间的0.85分）。
对于足内旋者，与假肌内效贴相比，肌内效贴不能纠正足内旋。
