Ptaszkowski Kuba, Slupska Lucyna, Paprocka-Borowicz Małgorzata, Kołcz-Trzęsicka Anna, Zwierzchowski Kamil, Halska Urszula, Przestrzelska Monika, Mucha Dariusz, Rosińczuk Joanna
Department of Obstetrics, Faculty of Health Science, Wroclaw Medical University, K. Bartla 5, 51-618 Wroclaw, Poland.
Department of Clinical Biomechanics and Physiotherapy in Motor System Disorders, Faculty of Health Science, Wroclaw Medical University, Grunwaldzka 2, 50-355 Wroclaw, Poland.
Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2015;2015:721938. doi: 10.1155/2015/721938. Epub 2015 Aug 12.
The main purpose of the study was to evaluate the resting bioelectrical activity of the upper trapezius muscle (the UT muscle) before and after one of the two interventions: postisometric muscle relaxation (PIR) and Kinesio Taping (KT). Moreover a comparison between group results was conducted. From the initial 61 volunteers, 52 were selected after exclusion criteria and were allocated randomly to 2 groups: PIR group and KT group. Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and completion of the intervention. The primary outcome measure was change in bioelectrical activity of UT muscle evaluated by surface electromyography (sEMG). Secondary outcomes included subjective assessment of pain using visual analogue scale (VAS). Significant differences were found only in KT group: the average resting bioelectrical activity decreased by 0.8 μV (p = 0.0237) and the average VAS result reduced by 2.0 points (p = 0.0001). Greater decrease of VAS results was recorded in KT group compared to PIR group (p = 0.0010). Both PIR and KT intervention did not influence significantly the resting bioelectrical activity of UT muscle. KT application was better for pain relief in the studied sample compared with PIR intervention.
本研究的主要目的是评估在两种干预措施之一(等长收缩后肌肉放松(PIR)和肌内效贴扎(KT))前后,上斜方肌(UT肌)的静息生物电活动。此外,还对两组结果进行了比较。从最初的61名志愿者中,根据排除标准筛选出52名,并随机分为两组:PIR组和KT组。在基线和干预结束时评估结果指标。主要结果指标是通过表面肌电图(sEMG)评估的UT肌生物电活动的变化。次要结果包括使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)对疼痛进行主观评估。仅在KT组中发现了显著差异:平均静息生物电活动降低了0.8μV(p = 0.0237),平均VAS结果降低了2.0分(p = 0.0001)。与PIR组相比,KT组的VAS结果下降幅度更大(p = 0.0010)。PIR和KT干预均未对UT肌的静息生物电活动产生显著影响。与PIR干预相比,在研究样本中,KT贴扎在缓解疼痛方面效果更好。