Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Galgotias University, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India.
Department of Physiotherapy, School of Allied Health Sciences, Madhav University, Abu Road, Sirohi, Rajasthan, India.
PeerJ. 2024 Jan 26;12:e16799. doi: 10.7717/peerj.16799. eCollection 2024.
In 2020, 203 million people experienced neck pain, with a higher prevalence in women. By 2050, it is predicted that neck pain will affect 269 million people, representing a 32.5% increase. Physical rehabilitation is often employed for the treatment of chronic non-specific neck pain (CNSNP) and the associated functional loss. Taping is frequently used as an adjunct treatment alongside primary physical rehabilitation. Unlike kinesio tape (KT), the therapeutic benefits of dynamic tape (DT) have not been thoroughly explored and documented in non-athletic conditions. Therefore, the aim of this trial was to determine the effects of DT on pain, disability, and overall well-being in individuals experiencing CNSNP.
A prospective parallel-group active controlled trial was conducted at a single center, involving 136 patients with CNSNP, randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio. The sham taping group (STC) received standard physiotherapy care ( = 67) alongside DT without tension, while the dynamic taping group (DTC) ( = 69) underwent standard cervical offloading technique with appropriate tension in addition to standard physiotherapy care. Demographic information and three patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), namely the Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and the World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index (WHO-5), were collected for each participant at three time points (baseline, four weeks post-taping, and four weeks follow-up).
At baseline, no significant differences were observed between the STC and DTC for any outcome measure. Notably, all three PROMs exhibited a significant improvement from baseline to four weeks post-intervention, with moderate to small effect sizes (NDI = 0.21, VAS = 0.23, and WHO-55 = 0.05). The WHO-5 scores for both groups demonstrated improvement from baseline through follow-up ( < 0.001). The NDI and VAS scores ameliorated from baseline to the four weeks post-taping period, with marginal improvements observed during the four weeks follow-up.
The incorporation of DT as an adjunct to standard physiotherapy care yielded enhancements in pain levels, functional disability, and well-being among patients with CNSNP when compared to the sham group. However, the sustainability of these improvements beyond the taping period lacks statistical significance and warrants further validation.
2020 年，有 2.03 亿人经历过颈部疼痛，女性的患病率更高。到 2050 年，预计将有 2.69 亿人患有颈部疼痛，患病率增加 32.5%。物理康复通常用于治疗慢性非特异性颈部疼痛（CNSNP）和相关的功能丧失。贴扎通常作为主要物理康复的辅助治疗。与肌内效贴布（Kinesio tape，KT）不同，动态贴扎（Dynamic tape，DT）的治疗益处尚未在非运动条件下得到充分探索和记录。因此，本试验旨在确定 DT 对患有 CNSNP 的个体的疼痛、残疾和整体幸福感的影响。
在一家单中心进行前瞻性平行组活性对照试验，纳入 136 例 CNSNP 患者，随机分为 1:1 比例的假贴扎组（Sham taping control，STC）和动态贴扎组（Dynamic taping control，DTC）。假贴扎组（STC）接受标准物理治疗（n=67），同时给予无张力的 DT；动态贴扎组（DTC）（n=69）在接受标准颈椎减压技术的同时，给予适当张力的 DT，并结合标准物理治疗。每位参与者在三个时间点（基线、贴扎后四周和随访四周）收集人口统计学信息和三个患者报告的结局测量（PROMS），即颈部残疾指数（Neck Disability Index，NDI）、视觉模拟量表（Visual Analogue Scale，VAS）和世界卫生组织 5 项健康量表（World Health Organization-Five Well-Being Index，WHO-5）。
基线时，假贴扎组和动态贴扎组在任何结局测量上均无显著差异。值得注意的是，所有三个 PROMS 均从基线到干预后四周均有显著改善，具有中等至小的效应量（NDI=0.21，VAS=0.23，WHO-5=0.05）。两组的 WHO-5 评分均从基线改善到随访（<0.001）。NDI 和 VAS 评分从基线到贴扎后四周改善，在随访四周时略有改善。
与假贴扎组相比，DT 作为标准物理治疗的辅助手段，可提高 CNSNP 患者的疼痛水平、功能障碍和幸福感。然而，这些改善在贴扎期后是否可持续尚缺乏统计学意义，需要进一步验证。
