Trial reportPloS one2019
Effects of elastic tape on kinematic parameters during a functional task in chronic hemiparetic subjects: A randomized sham-controlled crossover trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of kinesio taping therapy on gait and surface electromyography in stroke patients with hemiplegia.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundApproximately 50 to 70% of post-stroke subjects present a reduction in the upper limb (UL) function even during the chronic phase. An adjuvant technique widely used in neurorehabilitation is elastic taping applications. However, its efficacy in UL treatment for post-stroke subjects still requires further investigation.
objectiveTo verify the effects of elastic tape (ET) used on the paretic shoulder in upper limb (UL) performance during a drinking task.
methodA single-center randomized sham-controlled crossover trial randomized thirteen post-stroke subjects with mild to moderate UL impairment for group allocation to receive first Sham Tape (ST) or first Elastic Tape (ET), with one month of washout. Kinematic measures of a drinking task were taken before and after each intervention (elastic and sham tape), using Three-Dimensional Motion Analysis, and studied using feature analysis and Statistical Parametric Mapping. Outcome measures included spatiotemporal variables, scalar kinematic parameters (starting angles, range of motion-ROM, and endpoint angles) and time-normalized kinematic waveforms of trunk and UL joint angles (scapulothoracic, humerothoracic and elbow).
resultsElastic tape provided common modifications throughout the task (shoulder more towards midline, reduced scapula protraction and trunk flexion) and important alterations at specific time-instants. At the end of the reaching phase, for both groups (ET and ST), the elastic tape increased elbow extension [ET: CI = 12.57 (6.90 to 18.17), p<0.001; ST: CI: 12.89 (6.79 to 18.98), p<0.001). At the end of transporting the glass to the mouth, patients who underwent the elastic tape intervention presented more shoulder elevation [ET: CI = 16.40 (4.28 to 28.52), p = 0.007; ST: CI: 15.13 (5.79 to 24.48), p = 0.002)]. Moreover, an increase of elbow extension at the end of transporting the glass to the table was observed for both groups [ET: CI = 8.13 (1.48 to 14.79), p = 0.014; ST: CI: 8.20 (4.03 to 12.38), p<0.001)]. However, no changes in the spatiotemporal parameters were observed for both groups during all the phases of the task (p>0.05).
conclusionThe ET changed UL joint motions and posture during a drinking task in chronic hemiparetic subjects, which defines its role as an adjuvant therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.