Kul Ayhan, Ugur Mahir
Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Regional Education and Research Hospital, Erzurum, Turkey.
Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Atatürk University School of Medicine, Erzurum, Turkey.
Eurasian J Med. 2019 Jun;51(2):139-144. doi: 10.5152/eurasianjmed.2018.17421. Epub 2018 Nov 30.
The aim of the present study was to compare the effectiveness of kinesio taping (KT) treatments and conventional physical therapy (PT) modalities that are applied to reduce pain and improve physical movements and functions of patients with sub acromial impingement syndrome (SIS).
Forty patients were randomly divided into two equal groups. The first group was assigned KT plus home exercise program (HEP) for 15 days. The second group was given 15 sessions of PT and HEP. Patients were assessed using active joint range of motion (ROM), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; rest, movement, and night pain), the Society of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Evaluation (ASESS-100), Constant-Murley (C-M) scale, and Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) index at before and after treatment and at the end of the study (first month control visit).
Physical therapy was found to be more effective than KT when these two treatment modalities were assessed based on ASESS-100, WORC index values, night pain, and movement pain. PT and KT treatments have similar effects in active ROM, rest pain, and C-M scale. At the end of the study, they were found to have similar effects except the night pain value. PT was found to be more effective for night pain than KT.
Physical therapy was concluded to be more effective after treatment. The application of KT does not appear to be an alternative treatment method for SIS, but it can provide a potential supportive care for SIS. However, the outcomes suggest that KT can provide a remarkable benefit.
本研究旨在比较肌内效贴布(KT)治疗与传统物理治疗(PT)方法在减轻疼痛、改善肩峰下撞击综合征(SIS)患者身体活动及功能方面的有效性。
40例患者被随机分为两组,每组人数相等。第一组接受KT治疗并结合家庭锻炼计划(HEP),为期15天。第二组接受15次PT治疗并结合HEP。在治疗前后及研究结束时(第一个月的对照访视),使用主动关节活动范围(ROM)、视觉模拟评分法(VAS;静息、活动及夜间疼痛)、美国肩肘外科医师协会评估(ASESS - 100)、Constant - Murley(C - M)量表以及西 Ontario肩袖(WORC)指数对患者进行评估。
基于ASESS - 100、WORC指数值、夜间疼痛及活动疼痛评估这两种治疗方法时,发现物理治疗比KT治疗更有效。PT和KT治疗在主动ROM、静息疼痛及C - M量表方面具有相似效果。在研究结束时,除夜间疼痛值外,发现它们具有相似效果。发现PT在缓解夜间疼痛方面比KT更有效。
得出结论,物理治疗在治疗后更有效。KT的应用似乎不是SIS的替代治疗方法,但可为SIS提供潜在的支持性护理。然而,结果表明KT可带来显著益处。