Trial reportPloS one2024
Effects of Kinesio taping on lower limb biomechanical characteristics during the cutting maneuver in athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.
Trial report in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of visual disruption on the lower limb kinematic and kinetic characteristics in athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- The Biomechanical Effects of Kinesiology Taping Methods on Side-Step Cutting Movements in Chronic Ankle Instability.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo determine the effects of Kinesio taping (KT) on the biomechanical characteristics of the lower limbs during the 90° cutting maneuver in anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction (ACLR) athletes.
methodEighteen ACLR athletes were recruited and subjected randomly to three taping conditions, KT, placebo taping (PT), and no taping (NT), followed by a 90° cutting test. A nine-camera infrared high-speed motion capture system (Vicon, T40, 200 Hz) was used to record the kinematic parameters of the lower limbs during the cutting maneuver, and a three-dimensional dynamometer (Kistler, 1000 Hz) was used to record the kinetic parameters of the lower limbs. A one-way repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted to compare the differences in the lower limb kinematic and kinetic characteristics of ACLR athletes subjected to these interventions.
resultsDuring the landing phase, the knee valgus angle reduced significantly with KT than with NT (95% confidence interval = -1.399 to -0.154; P = 0.025), whereas no significant difference was observed between PT and NT (95% confidence interval = -1.251 to 0.217; P = 0.236). No significant differences were observed in the other kinematic variables among the three taping conditions (P > 0.05). During the landing phase, no significant differences in the kinetic variables were observed among the three taping conditions (P > 0.05).
conclusionsAlthough KT does not improve the kinetic variables of athletes after ACLR during the 90° cutting maneuver, it reduces the knee valgus angle, which could reduce the risk of secondary ACL injury.
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.