Effect of Kinesio Taping On Muscle Strength in Athletes - A Pilot Study
Effect of Kinesio Taping On Muscle Strength in Athletes - A Pilot Study
Effect of Kinesio Taping On Muscle Strength in Athletes - A Pilot Study
SHORT REPORT
Introduction
Kinesio tape, invented by Kenzo Kase in 1996, is
a new application of adhesive taping. It is a thin
and elastic tape which can be stretched up to
120140% of its original length, making it quite
elastic and resulting in less mechanism constraints,
compared with conventional tape. Kinesio taping,
an organised wrapping technique using Kinesio tape
proposed by Kase, is claimed to be able to reduce
pain, swelling and muscle spasms, as well as to prevent sport injury.1
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mr5598@adm.cgmh.org.tw,
fic6481@tcts1.seed.net.tw (Y.-C. Pei).
1440-2440/$ see front matter 2007 Sports Medicine Australia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2007.02.011
199
Instrumentation
The Cybex NORM isokinetic dynamometer (Lumex
Corporation, Ronkonloma, NY, USA) was adopted
to assess concentric and eccentric muscle
strength in the quadriceps and hamstring muscles while contracting at a speed of 60 /s and
180 /s.
Subjects were taped with a Y-shaped Kinesio tape
at the quadriceps according to the Kenzo Kases
Kinesio taping manual (Kase et al., 1996)7 by the
same physician. The dominant side of the subjects
knees were taped. Fig. 1 illustrates the subjects
posture when Kinesio taping is being applied. The
subjects lay in the supine position with the hip
flexed at 30 and the knee flexed at 60 . The
tape was applied from a point 10 cm inferior to
the anterior superior iliac spine, bisected at the
junction between quadriceps femoris tendon and
the patella, and circled around the patella, ending at its inferior side. The first 5 cm of tape were
not stretched and acted as the anchor. The portion between the anchor and superior patella was
stretched to 120%. The remaining tape around the
patella remained un-stretched.
Test protocol
Taping conditions
Three taping conditions were applied to each subject: (1) without taping (WT); (2) immediately
under taping (IT); (3) 12 h after taping and with
the tape still in situ (AT). Subjects were assessed
in each condition by three daily activities and
muscle strength was measured by the isokinetic
dynamometer.
The order of the three conditions was randomised using a random number allocation table.
To avoid any bias resulting from muscle fatigue
induced by the previous isokinetic assessments,
the inter-assessment intervals were at least
7 days.
Isokinetic muscle strength
Muscle strength was evaluated using a Cybex
NORM. Each subject was given verbal instructions
to maximise effort and was allowed to see the
monitor. The sequence of evaluation was as follows: concentric quadriceps contractions at 60 /s;
eccentric quadriceps contractions at 60 /s; concentric quadriceps contractions at 180 /s and
eccentric quadriceps contraction at 180 /s. The
same testing protocol was repeated to test hamstring muscle strength.
Data analysis
Analysis by ANOVA for repeated measures (three
conditions) was used to assess the effect of Kinesio taping on muscle strength. Main effect analysis
was applied in cases of significant difference among
the three assessments. Estimates of effect size
were analysed using the partial eta-squared method
to describe the proportion of total variability
200
T.-C. Fu et al.
Table 1 Comparison of peak torque, and total work of quadriceps and hamstring muscles, and functional activity
among the three taping conditions
Concentric/eccentric
Velocity
( /s)
Contractor
Condition
WT
IT
p-Value
Effect
size
AT
60
60
180
180
60
60
180
180
Quadriceps
Quadriceps
Quadriceps
Quadriceps
Hamstring
Hamstring
Hamstring
Hamstring
43.8
45.4
33.2
39.4
26.2
25.3
23.7
21.1
13.4
16.1
10.6
13.6
10.3
7.5
8.1
6.8
40.9
43.4
32.4
37.9
25.3
23.7
22.9
19.5
12.2
14.1
12.0
13.5
9.3
7.1
7.5
6.0
43.0
44.7
36.4
41.4
25.6
24.0
22.2
19.5
12.3
14.6
12.3
13.8
8.2
7.0
7.2
6.1
0.323
0.597
0.027a
0.194
0.568
0.108
0.496
0.194
0.083
0.039
0.242
0.119
0.043
0.157
0.052
0.119
60
60
180
180
60
60
180
180
Quadriceps
Quadriceps
Quadriceps
Quadriceps
Hamstring
Hamstring
Hamstring
Hamstring
27.4
28.0
22.5
26.7
22.2
18.9
21.2
16.0
8.1
10.8
6.2
8.9
9.5
4.5
7.4
4.0
25.7
29.1
21.2
28.2
21.7
18.4
19.9
15.6
6.9
12.3
6.4
10.9
8.9
4.8
6.6
4.4
26.1
29.3
22.9
28.2
22.7
19.1
20.6
16.4
6.6
10.2
6.1
8.4
8.4
5.1
7.4
4.0
0.466
0.708
0.330
0.571
0.474
0.582
0.486
0.382
0.050
0.026
0.082
0.033
0.056
0.041
0.054
0.071
WT: without taping; IT: immediately after taping; AT: 12 h after taping; ab: comparing WT and IT, bc: comparing IT and AT; ac:
comparing AT and WT.
a Difference: AB, AC.
Results
Two data were excluded from data analysis due
to the subjects factor; final data for analysis
consisted of seven males and seven females. All
subjects were healthy athletes, and none complained of pain or discomfort during examination.
Evaluation of comparison of peak torque and
total work of quadriceps and hamstring muscle by
isokinetic assessments was shown in Table 1. The
ANOVA for repeated measures for the three conditions indicated that WT had the lowest peak
torque among the three conditions in concentric
contraction of the quadriceps at 180 /s (p < 0.05).
No significant differences existed among subjects
in other assessments. Additionally, no significant
interaction effect existed between conditions and
assessments (p > 0.05).
Discussion
The results suggest that Kinesio taping does not
enhance nor inhibit muscle strength when applied
Practical implications
Kinesio taping neither decreases nor increases
muscle power in uninjured athletes.
The ineffectiveness of changing muscle power
by Kinesio taping is observed immediately and
12 h after the application.
The effect of Kinesio taping on muscle power
of injured athletes has not been confirmed yet.
References
1. Halseth T, McChesney JW, DeBeliso M, et al. The effects of
Kinesio taping on proprioception at the ankle. J Sports Sci
Med 2004;3:17.
201
2. Cools AM, Witvrouw EE, Danneels LA, et al. Does taping
influence electromyographic muscle activity in the scapular rotators in healthy shoulders? Manual Ther 2002;7:
15462.
3. Hinman RS, Bennell KL, Crossley KM, et al. Immediate
effects of adhesive tape on pain and disability in individuals with knee osteoarthritis. Rheumatology 2003;42:
8659.
4. Ernst GP, Kawaguchi J, Saliba E. Effect of patellar taping on knee kinetics of patients with patellofemoral
pain syndrome. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1999;29:
6617.
5. Macgregor K, Gerlach S, Mellor R, et al. Cutaneous stimulation from patella tape causes a differential increase in
vasti muscle activity in people with patellofemoral pain. J
Orthop Res 2005;23:3518.
6. Murray H, Husk L. Effects of Kinesio taping on proprioception in the ankle. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2001;31:
A-37.
7. Kase K, Tatsuyuki H, Tomoko O. Development of Kinesio
tape. Kinesio Taping Perfect Manual. Kinesio Taping Association 1996;610:1178.
8. Morrissey D. Proprioceptive shoulder taping. J Bodywork
Movement Ther 2000;4:18994.
9. Janwantanakul P, Gaogasigam C. Vastus lateralis and vastus
medialis obliquus muscle activity during the application of
inhibition and facilitation taping techniques. Clin Rehabil
2005;19:129.
10. Ridding MC, Brouwer B, Miles TS, et al. Changes in muscle
responses to stimulation of the motor cortex induced by
peripheral nerve stimulation in human subjects. Exp Brain
Res 2000;131:13543.
11. Simoneau GG, Degner RM, Kramper C, et al. Changes in
ankle joint proprioception resulting from strips of athletic
tape applied over the skin. J Athl Train 1997.