Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Medicine ®

OPEN

The efficacy of kinesio taping as an adjunct to

physical therapy for chronic low back pain for at
least two weeks
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/md-journal by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCy

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled

wCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 05/03/2023

trials
∗
Guangchen Sun, MB, Qiliang Lou, MB

Astract
Background: Kinesio taping (KT) is a relatively new treatment method for chronic low back pain (CLBP). The effectiveness of KT as
an adjunct to physical therapy (PT) for CLBP remains controversial.
Objective: The aim of this updated meta-analysis was to critically examine and evaluate the evidence of recent randomized
controlled trials regarding the effectiveness of KT as an adjunct to PT for CLBP for at least 2 weeks.
Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis was written following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews
and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines. Seven electronic databases including Web of Science, Embase, PubMed,
Wanfang Data, Scopus, Science Direct, Cochrane Library were searched in September 2020 by two independent reviewers. The risk
of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool. Data analysis was performed with Review Manager Software.
Results: Twelve randomized controlled trials with a total of 676 patients were included in our study. Mean improvements were
significantly higher in the KT+PT group than the PT group for pain score (SMD, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.37–1.08], P < .00001) and disability
(SMD, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.42–1.59], P = .0007). Of 12 studies based on the pain score, 7 reported KT+PT patients to have significantly
less pain at latest follow-up when compared with PA patients (P < .05). Of 11 studies based on the disability, 8 reported KT+PT
patients to have significantly better improvements at latest follow-up when compared with PA patients (P < .05).
Conclusion: Kinesio taping combined with physical therapy provided better therapeutic effects regarding pain reduction and
disability improvement compared with physical therapy alone in individuals with chronic low back pain.
Limitation:
1. Included studies and sample sizes were small and most studies were with moderate evidence level;
2. several important outcomes such as range of motion and distance walked were lack;
3. heterogeneity among the included studies was unavoidable.

Abbreviations: CI = confidence interval, CLBP = chronic low back pain, KT = kinesio taping, PRISMA = Preferred Reporting
Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, PT = physical therapy, RCTs = randomized controlled trials, SMD = standardized
mean differences.
Keywords: chronic low back pain, kinesio taping, meta, pain control, physical therapy, review

Editor: Maya Saranathan.

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].
Department of Orthopaedic, The First People’s Hospital of Jiashan, Zhejiang, China.
∗
Correspondence: Qiliang Lou, Department of Orthopaedic, The First People’s Hospital of Jiashan, Zhejiang, 314100, China (e-mail: [email protected]).
Copyright © 2021 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC), where it is permissible to
download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal.
How to cite this article: Sun G, Lou Q. The efficacy of kinesio taping as an adjunct to physical therapy for chronic low back pain for at least two weeks: A systematic
review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Medicine 2021;00(00).Medicine 2021;100:49(e28170).
Received: 13 October 2020 / Received in final form: 14 November 2021 / Accepted: 19 November 2021
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000028170

1
Sun and Lou Medicine (2021) 100:49 Medicine

1. Introduction 1. participants: patients with CLBP should present with an

Low back pain is defined as pain between the 12th rib and the episode of chronic pain with limitation of motion in the lower
inferior gluteal folds. Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is defined as back and demonstrate a normal low back on X-ray, magnetic
back pain lasting more than 12 weeks. The causal factors of CLBP resonance imaging or computed tomography;
are identified in 5% to 15% of cases, whereas more than 85% of 2. Intervention: patients received KT+PT;
patients exhibit nonspecific low back pain. Most patients suffer 3. comparator: patients received PT alone;
from CLBP for over a year, and only 25% recover fully, without 4. outcomes: outcomes which assessed pain intensity or
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/md-journal by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCy

disability.[1–3] disability;
Several treatment strategies for CLBP are provided in the 5. study design: randomized controlled trials.
wCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 05/03/2023

current literature, which including limited bed rest, pharmaco- The exclusion criteria were as follows:
logical therapy, acupuncture, and general exercises. A relatively
new treatment method for CLBP is Kinesio taping (KT), which is 1. outcomes which assessed pain intensity or disability were not
being widely used as a relatively novel band-aid method to reduce reported;
the pain of musculoskeletal disorders.[4] KT is an elastic bonding 2. no direct comparison of KT+PT and PT;
material containing high tensile capacity, which ensures the free 3. studies with the following types: case reports, comments or
movement of the application area without the need of drugs or letters, biochemical trials, protocols, conference abstracts,
chemicals.[5–7] Studies have shown that KT improves blood and reviews, and retrospective studies or prospective non-
lymph circulation, mitigates pain, adjusts joints, and relives randomized studies.
muscle tension.[8]
One meta-analysis demonstrated that KT could improve pain
2.3. Study selection
and function in patients with CLBP compared with sham
taping.[9] Another recent meta-analysis investigated the effects of Articles were exported to EndNote, and duplicates removed. Two
KT in patients with CLBP and found no evidence to support the independent authors screened the titles and abstracts of
use of KT in clinical practice for patients with CLBP.[10] The other potentially relevant studies to determine their eligibility based
reviews could not reach conclusive evidence of bright side of on the criteria. Disagreements were resolved through a discussion
KT.[11] To the best of our knowledge, only a meta-analysis has with a third review author.
compared the therapeutic efficacy of KT combined with physical
therapy (PT) and PT alone for pain control in patients with 2.4. Data extraction
CLBP.[10] However, only 5 studies were included in the meta-
analysis,[12–16] and a good number of new trials have been Data were extracted by review of each study for population,
published since then. Therefore, the aim of this updated meta- mean age, gender, follow-up duration, study design, publishing
analysis was to critically examine and evaluate the evidence of date, KT and PT characteristics, and outcomes assessment. The
recent randomized controlled trials regarding the effectiveness of two reviewers created a study-specific speadsheet in Excel
KT as an adjunct to PT for CLBP for at least 2 weeks. The results (Microsoft Corp., USA) for data collection. Data extraction
of this study will provide new information about the usefulness of was performed independently, and any conflict was resolved
KT as an additional component of a guideline-endorsed before final analysis. Any disagreements between the two
physiotherapy program in patients with CLBP. reviewers were discussed and, if necessary, the third author
was referred to for arbitration. If the data were missing or could
not be extracted directly, authors were contacted by email.
2. Materials and methods Otherwise, we calculated them with the guideline of Cochrane
2.1. Selection of studies Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.1.0. If
necessary, we would abandon the extraction of incomplete data.
This systematic review and meta-analysis was written following
the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-
Analyses (PRISMA) statement guidelines. Seven electronic 2.5. Quality assessment
databases including Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, Wanfang The GRADE system (Grading of Recommendations Assessment,
Data, Scopus, Science Direct, Cochrane Library were searched in Development and Evaluation) was used by two independent
September 2020 by two independent reviewers (lasting for 1 reviewers to rate the overall quality of evidence in each pooled
week). For search on PubMed, the search terms used were analysis. The following 7 items were used to assess the quality of
“Kinesio taping OR Kinesio tape OR Kinesiotape AND chronic randomized controlled trials: random sequence generation,
low back pain OR chronic non-specific low back pain OR non- allocation concealment, blinding of participants and personnel,
specific low back pain.” The reference lists of the included studies blinding of outcome assessment, incomplete outcome data,
were also checked for additional studies that were not identified selective reporting, and other bias. The quality rating high is
with the database search. There was no restriction in the dates of reserved for evidence based on randomized controlled trials. The
publication or language in the search. No ethical approval was quality rating moderate, low, or very low were rated depending
required in our study because all analyses were based on on the following four factors: risk of bias, inconsistency of effect,
aggregate data from previously published studies. imprecision, and indirectness. When the heterogeneity was high,
inconsistency was considered serious. When there was no direct
comparison between KT + PA and PA alone, indirectness was
2.2. Inclusion and exclusion criteria
considered serious and researchers had to make comparisons
Study included in this systematic review and meta-analysis had to across studies. When there was fewer than 400 participants for
meet all of the following inclusion criteria in the PICOS order: each outcome, imprecision was considered an appreciable risk.

2
Sun and Lou Medicine (2021) 100:49 www.md-journal.com

Any controversy was resolved by discussing with a third author patients were included (Fig. 1).[12–23] Among the 12 RCTs, a total
to reach a final consensus. Kappa values were used to measure the of 676 patients participated (339 randomized to the intervention
degree of agreement between the 2 reviewers and were rated as group, 337 randomized to a control group) with a follow-up rate
follows: fair, 0.40 to 0.59; good, 0.60 to 0.74; and excellent, 0.75 of 100%. The frequency weighted mean age of participants was
or more. 43.2 years, and 52.7% were female. The follow-up period ranged
from 2 weeks to 6 months. Nine of the studies assessed pain using
2.6. Statistical analysis the visual analog scale (VAS),[12,13,15–19,22,23] whereas only 3
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/md-journal by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCy

studies reported pain using the numeric rating scale

Data analysis was performed with Review Manager Software (NRS).[14,20,21] Seven of the studies assessed disability using
(RevMan Version 5.4, The Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, the Oswestry pain and disability index (ODI),[14,15,18–22] three
wCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 05/03/2023

Denmark). As outcomes which assessed pain intensity and studies used Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire
disability were reported on different scores, we used the (RMDQ),[12,13,16] and only 1 study used Oswestry Physical
standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence Disability Questionnaire (OPDQ).[23] A detailed description of all
interval (CI) to assess for these outcomes. A P value < .05 was included studies can be found in Table 1.
considered statistically significant. All outcomes were pooled on
random-effect model. The statistical heterogeneity was assessed by
using the Cochrane Q test and I2 statistic. The low, moderate, and 3.2. Methodologic quality assessment
high heterogeneity were assigned to I2 values of 0% to 25%, 26% The critical appraisal of the included trials using the Cochrane risk
to 74%, and above 75%. A meta-analysis was conducted when 4 of bias tool is detailed in Figure 2A and summarised using a stacked
or more trials reported an outcome of interest. A subanalysis was bar chart in Figure 2B. Allocation concealment was adequately
performed to isolate results from patients who received KT+PT and reported by Added et al,[12] except in 11 studies where the
PT alone. A sensitivity analysis was planned by different follow-up concealment of allocation from the investigators was unclear
periods. Begg’s funnel plot was used to assess publication bias. If (unclear risk of bias).[13–23] All of 12 trials failed to blind both the
publication bias exists, the Begg’s funnel plot is asymmetric. therapists and participants.[12–23] Among trials included in this
review, all trials described clear inclusion and exclusion criteria.
3. Results Adequate random sequence generation was reported in 10
trials.[12,14–20,22,23] The outcome assessors were blinded in only
3.1. Study selection, characteristics 3 studies.[12,16,17] Trial registration number or study protocol was
The initial search used very broad terms and resulted in 573 total available for 1 trial. The proportion of patients lost to follow-up
articles. Twelve studies met inclusion and exclusion criteria and was <20% in all studies, indicating low attrition bias. All studies
were included in our study. Briefly, 12 RCTs with a total of 676 did report results of all predefined measures, indicating low

Records identified through database Additional records identified

searching through other sources
(n = 570) (n = 3)

Records after duplicates removed

(n = 81)
Exclusion after title/abstract
review
(n = 59)
Full-text articles assessed
for eligibility
(n = 22)
Conference abstract (n = 1);
Study protocol (n = 2);
No comparison of KT+PT and PT alone (n = 6);
Not assessed the pain score or disability (n = 1)
Studies included in
quantitative synthesis
(meta-analysis)
(n = 12)
Figure 1. PRISMA Flow diagram describing the selection process for relevant clinical trials used in this meta-analysis.

3
Sun and Lou Medicine (2021) 100:49 Medicine

Table 1
Study characteristics and patient demographic details.
No. Female Mean age
Study Design (KT + PT, PT) (KT + PT, PT) (KT + PT, PT) Intervention (KT + PT) Control (PT) Outcomes
Added 2016 RCT 74, 74 53, 53 45.6, 44.6 KT: lasting for 5 weeks, 3 months, PT: exercise and manual VAS,
and 6 months; PT: exercise and therapy, lasting for 5 RMDQ
manual therapy, lasting for 5 weeks, 3 months, and
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/md-journal by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCy

weeks, 3 months, and 6 months 6 months

Azab 2020 RCT 14, 15 NR 11.8, 12.1 KT: two I-shaped tapes, lasting for 3 PT: 30-minute exercise VAS
wCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 05/03/2023

months; PT: 30-minute exercise program, three times

program, three times per week, per week, lasting for 3
lasting for 3 months months
Kachanathu RCT 20, 20 10 34.8 KT: two I-shaped tapes, lasting for 4 PT: 30-minute exercise VAS,
2014 weeks; PT: 30-minute exercise program, three times RMDQ,
program, three times per week, per week, lasting for 4 ROM
lasting for 4 weeks weeks
Kamali 2018 RCT 21, 21 11, 10 27.1. 25.1 KT: two bands of 5-cm KT, lasting for PT: manual therapy, one NRS, ODI
4 weeks; PT: manual therapy, one a day, lasting for 4
a day, lasting for 4 weeks weeks
Koroglu 2017 RCT 20, 20 12, 8 47.2, 47.9 KT: two bands of 5-cm KT, lasting for PT: exercise and manual VAS, ODI
4 week; PT: exercise and manual therapy, lasting for 4
therapy, lasting for 4 weeks weeks
Paoloni 2011 RCT 13, 13 8, 9 62, 62.7 KT: three bands of 5-cm KT, lasting PT: exercise and manual VAS,
for 4 week; PT: exercise and therapy, three times RMDQ
manual therapy, three times per per week, lasting for 4
week, lasting for 4 weeks weeks
Peng 2015 RCT 23, 23 10, 11 37.5, 36.1 KT: Y-shaped Kinesio type, three PT: ultrasound treatment, VAS, ODI
days/time, lasting for 3 weeks; PT: once a day, lasting for
ultrasound treatment, once a day, 3 weeks
lasting for 3 weeks
Senbursa RCT 24, 22 12, 11 45.3, 42.1 KT: lasting for 4 weeks and 8 weeks; PT: stabilization exercises, VAS, ODI
2020 PT: stabilization exercises, lasting lasting for 4 weeks
for 4 weeks and 8 weeks and 8 weeks
Song 2016 RCT 50, 50 23, 21 41.2, 38.8 KT: Y-shaped Kinesio type, one a day, PT: acupuncture therapy, NRS, ODI
lasting for 3 weeks; PT: once a day, lasting for
acupuncture therapy, once a day, 3 weeks
lasting for 3 weeks
Su 2015 RCT 20, 20 7, 9 NS KT: two I-shaped tapes, once a day, PT: tuina therapy, NRS, ODI,
lasting for 2 weeks and 4 weeks; electrotherapy, and ROM
PT: tuina therapy, electrotherapy, manual therapy, lasting
and manual therapy, lasting for 2 for 2 weeks and 4
weeks and 4 weeks weeks
Xu 2018 RCT 30, 30 16, 14 45.1, 45.2 KT: Y-shaped Kinesio type, one a day, PT: tuina therapy and VAS,
lasting for 2 weeks; PT: tuina electrotherapy, lasting OPDQ
therapy and electrotherapy, lasting for 2 weeks
for 2 weeks
Zhuang RCT 30, 29 17, 16 69.2, 68.1 KT: three times per week, lasting for PT: electrotherapy, three VAS, ODI
2019 2 weeks and 4 weeks; PT: times per week, lasting
electrotherapy, three times per for 2 weeks and 4
week, lasting for 2 weeks and 4 weeks
weeks
KT = kinesio taping, NRS = Numerical rating scale, ODI = Oswestry pain and disability index, OPDQ = Oswestry physical disability questionnaire, PT = physical therapy, RCT = randomized controlled trial, RMDQ =
Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, VAS = Visual Analogue Scale.

reporting bias. None of other bias was detected. The overall kappa for pain intensity reduction was 78%, suggesting that moderate
value regarding the evaluation of risk of bias was 0.814, meaning to high heterogeneity may be present. A meta-analysis of 11
an excellent degree of agreement between the two reviewers. studies[12–16,18–23] comparing patients treated with KT + PT
versus PT alone showed that the disability reduction in the KT +
PT group was significantly greater than that in the PT group for
3.3. Quantitative analysis and GRADE summary
at least 2 weeks after initial treatments (SMD, 1.01 [95% CI,
A meta-analysis of 12 trials[12–23] comparing patients treated 0.42–1.59], P = .0007) (Fig. 4). The I2 statistic for disability
with KT + PT versus PT alone showed that the pain intensity reduction was 91%, suggesting that high heterogeneity may be
reduction in the KT + PT group was significantly greater than that present. The GRADE system was used to evaluate the quality of
in the PT group for at least 2 weeks after initial treatments (SMD, outcomes in this study. The quality of evidence regarding the
0.73 [95% CI, 0.37–1.08], P < .00001) (Fig. 3). The I2 statistic outcomes was low. The factors that lowered the quality

4
Sun and Lou Medicine (2021) 100:49 www.md-journal.com
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/md-journal by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCy
wCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 05/03/2023

B
Figure 2. (A) Risk of bias summary; (B) risk of bias graph.

according to the GRADE were the high statistical heterogeneity, 3.4. Subanalysis and sensitivity analysis
and the unclear risk of selection, and the high risk of 3.4.1. Subanalysis on outcome of pain intensity reduction.
performance bias. The details of the results are summarized Of the 12 studies that utilized pain scores,[12–23] 9 studies[12,13,15–
19,22,23]
in Table 2. reported VAS scores and 3 studies reported NRS

5
Sun and Lou Medicine (2021) 100:49 Medicine
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/md-journal by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCy
wCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 05/03/2023

Figure 3. Forest plots of the pain intensity reduction between KT + PT group and PT group after CLBP.

Figure 4. Forest plots of the disability reduction between KT + PT group and PT group after CLBP.

scores.[14,20,21] All 12 studies reporting on pain intensity ODI scores,[14,15,18–22] 3 studies reported RMDQ scores,[12,13,16]
reduction found KT + PT patients to improve significantly from and 1 study utilized OPDQ scores.[23] All 7 studies reporting on ODI
baseline to final follow-up. When comparing KT + PT and PT scores, 2 of the 3 studies reporting on RMDQ scores, and 1 study
patients at latest follow-up, 7 of the possible 12 outcome scores reporting on OPDQ scores found KT + PT patients to improve
(58.3%) demonstrated significant improvement in patients significantly from baseline to final follow-up. When comparing
undergoing treatment with KT + PT when compared with PT, KT + PT and PT patients at latest follow-up, 8 [14,15,18,19–23] of
while none (0%) demonstrated superiority with PT.[13,15,17–20,23] the possible 11 outcome scores (72.7%) demonstrated significant
improvement in patients undergoing treatment with KT + PT
3.4.2. Subanalysis on outcome of disability reduction. Of the when compared with PT, while only 1 of the possible 11 outcome
11 studies that assessed disability,[12–16,18–23] 7 studies reported scores (9.1%) demonstrated superiority with PT.

Table 2
GRADE summary of findings.
Summary of results Quality of the evidence (GRADE)
Outcomes Participants (trials), n SMD (95% CI) P Design Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision Quality
∗ †
Pain intensity reduction 676 (12) 0.73 (0.37 to 1.08) <.00001 Limitations Yes No No Low
∗
Disability reduction 647 (11) 1.01 (0.42 to 1.59) .0007 Limitations Yes† No No Low
GRADE = Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation; SMD = standard mean difference.
∗
Lack of blinding of participants and personnel.
†
Large statistical heterogeneity, I2 > 75%.

6
Sun and Lou Medicine (2021) 100:49 www.md-journal.com
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/md-journal by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCy
wCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 05/03/2023

Figure 5. Forest plots of the pain intensity reduction between KT + PT group and PT group after CLBP between 2 weeks and 4 weeks.

3.4.3. Sensitivity analysis based on follow-up periods. Of the 4. Discussion

12 studies that assessed pain intensity reduction, 10 studies The most important finding of the present study showed that
reported pain intensity reduction between 2 weeks and 4 weeks, the therapeutic effect of PT combined with KT provided
and 2 studies reported pain intensity reduction over 3 superior effects on pain and disability scores for at least 2
months.[12,17] The result was not changed when the studies of weeks after initial treatments compared with the PT alone. The
Added et al[12] and Azab et al[17] were removed (SMD, 0.78 [95% level of evidence of outcomes was low, indicating that the
CI, 0.40–1.15], P < .00001) (Fig. 5). Of the 11 studies that degree of benefit must be studied although the benefit is
assessed disability, 9 studies reported disability reduction conclusive.
between 2 weeks and 4 weeks, and 1 study reported disability CLBP is due to abnormal short or prolonged stresses that affect
reduction over 3 months. The result was not changed when the the muscular components of the lumbar and pelvic regions.
study of Added et al was removed (SMD, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.71– Muscle imbalances of the lumbopelvic region, as a result of
1.62], P < .00001) (Fig. 6). repetitive injury or physical stress, may contribute to the
lengthening and weakening of the phasic muscles, while the
postural muscles (antigravity) become tight and overactive.
3.5. Publication bias
Hypertonic postural muscles can lead to ischemia and reduced
The funnel plot of disability reduction was symmetrical, blood circulation, further aggravating pain. This imbalance
indicating a low risk of publication bias (Fig. 7A). However, modifies body movement, putting strain on muscles, tendons,
there were significant publication biases in the funnel plot of pain ligaments, and joints; consequently, the end result is often CLBP.
intensity reduction (Fig. 7B). After trimming by imputing the Although the mechanism through which KT acts on musculo-
missing studies, adding them to the analysis, and then skeletal conditions is not yet clear, it is hypothesized that KT
recomputing the effect size, the SMD did not changed applies pressure to the skin or stretches the skin and that this
significantly. external load may stimulate cutaneous mechanoreceptors (large

Figure 6. Forest plots of the disability reduction between KT + PT group and PT group after CLBP between 2 weeks and 4 weeks.

7
Sun and Lou Medicine (2021) 100:49 Medicine
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/md-journal by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCy
wCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 05/03/2023

Figure 7. (A) Funnel plot of publication bias for the disability reduction between KT + PT group and PT group after CLBP. There was symmetry, suggesting that
there was not a significant publication bias; (B) Funnel plot of publication bias for the pain intensity reduction between KT + PT group and PT group after CLBP.
There was not symmetry, suggesting that there was a significant publication bias.

myelinated fibers) and thus inhibit pain transmission according to that KT was no better than any other intervention for most the
the gate control theory. outcomes assessed in patients with CLBP.[10,11]
Numerous reviews and meta-analyses have been published The findings from our meta-analysis were not in line with
comparing the efficacy of KT in individuals with CLBP. In a meta- findings from a previous meta-analysis.[10] These differences
analysis that included 10 randomized controlled trials, Li et al resulted from limited studies included in their analysis. The
showed that KT was not superior to placebo taping for pain authors showed that there were no significant differences for pain
relief, but could significantly improve disability when compared intensity and disability between KT + PT and PT alone groups,
to the placebo taping.[24] Sheng et al included 8 studies to and thus concluded that there was no evidence to support the use
compare placebo taping with KT and found that significant of KT in clinical practice for patients with CLBP. However,
differences in mean pain level and disability, reporting that KT compared to 12 studies with 676 patients in our study, only 5
may be a new, simple and convenient choice for intervention in studies with relatively small sample size (396 patients) was
low back pain.[9] However, the other 2 meta-analysis showed included in their meta-analysis,[12–16] which might not powerful

8
Sun and Lou Medicine (2021) 100:49 www.md-journal.com

to discover the statistical differences between the two techniques. [5] Luz Junior MA, Sousa MV, Neves LA, et al. Kinesio Taping (is not better
than placebo in reducing pain and disability in patients with chronic non-
In addition, adequate subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses
specific low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Braz J Phys Ther
were not performed in their study. 2015;19:482–90.
Several limitations of the meta-analysis should be noted. First, [6] Alikhajeh Y, Barabadi E, Mohammad Rahimi GR. A comparison of 6
some important outcomes were not evaluated, such as range of weeks of aquatic exercise and Kinesio Taping in patients with chronic
motion and distance walked. However, there was a paucity of nonspecific low back pain. J Sport Rehabil 2020;21:1–6.
[7] Araujo AC, do Carmo Silva Parreira P, Junior LCH, et al. Medium term
studies on these functional assessment tools; thus, it was difficult effects of kinesio taping in patients with chronic non-specific low back
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/md-journal by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCy

to perform further analyses. Second, the total quality of included pain: A randomized controlled trial. Physiotherapy 2018;104:149–51.
studies was rated as moderate, and overall confidence in the [8] Macedo LB, Richards J, Borges DT, et al. Kinesio Taping reduces pain
outcomes was low, which may lead to overestimation of effect and improves disability in low back pain patients: A randomised
wCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 05/03/2023

controlled trial. Physiotherapy 2019;105:65–75.

and reduction in the recommendation rate of our pooled results.
[9] Sheng Y, Duan Z, Qu Q, et al. Kinesio taping in treatment of chronic
Third, heterogeneity among the included studies was unavoid- non-specific low back pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J
able due to the different regimens of KT and PT used. Rehabil Med 2019;51:734–40.
Heterogeneity was also caused by a variety of other factors, [10] Luz Junior MAD, Almeida MO, Santos RS, et al. Effectiveness of Kinesio
such as racial differences and age differences. Therefore, SMD Taping in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: A systematic
review with meta-analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2019;44:68–78.
and random-effect model were used to evaluate some outcomes in [11] Ramírez-Vélez R, Hormazábal-Aguayo I, Izquierdo M, et al. Effects of
our meta-analysis. Finally, despite 12 studies were included in kinesio taping alone versus sham taping in individuals with musculo-
this meta-analysis, there is a need for more high-quality RCT skeletal conditions after intervention for at least one week: A systematic
studies with large sample sizes to confirm the reliability of the review and meta-analysis. Physiotherapy 2019;105:412–20.
[12] Added MA, Costa LO, de Freitas DG, et al. Kinesio Taping does not
present study. Despite these limitations, the study demonstrated a
provide additional benefits in patients with chronic low back pain who
clear comparison of therapeutic effects between PT combined receive exercise and manual therapy: A randomized controlled trial. J
with KT and PT alone for the treatment of CLBP. Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2016;46:506–13.
Continued research in this area is needed, specifically as newer, [13] Kachanathu SJ, Alenazi AM, Seif HE, et al. Comparison between Kinesio
and possibly safer interventions become available. Future Taping and a traditional physical therapy program in treatment of
nonspecific low back pain. J Phys Ther Sci 2014;26:1185–8.
directions should focus on the cost-effectiveness the use of KT [14] Kamali F, Sinaei E, Taherkhani E. Comparing spinal manipulation with
in CLBP as well as the adverse effects. and without Kinesio Taping(®) in the treatment of chronic low back pain.
J Bodyw Mov Ther 2018;22:540–5.
[15] Köro glu F, Çolak TK, Polat MG. The effect of Kinesio (taping on pain,
5. Conclusions functionality, mobility and endurance in the treatment of chronic low
back pain: A randomized controlled study. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil
Kinesio taping combined with physical therapy provided better 2017;30:1087–93.
therapeutic effects regarding pain reduction and disability [16] Paoloni M, Bernetti A, Fratocchi G, et al. Kinesio Taping applied to
improvement compared with physical therapy alone in individu- lumbar muscles influences clinical and electromyographic character-
als with chronic low back pain. istics in chronic low back pain patients. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med
2011;47:237–44.
[17] Azab AR, Elnaggar RK, Diab RH, et al. Therapeutic value of kinesio
Author contributions taping in reducing lower back pain and improving back muscle
endurance in adolescents with hemophilia. J Musculoskelet Neuronal
Funding acquisition: Qiliang Lou. Interact 2020;20:256–64.
Methodology: Qiliang Lou. [18] Senbursa G, Pekyavas NO, Baltaci G. Comparison of physiotherapy
Project administration: Qiliang Lou. approaches in low back pain: A randomized controlled trial. Korean J
Fam Med 2020;42:96–106.
Writing – original draft: Guangchen Sun. [19] Peng L, Ruoqian M, Haitao D. Effect of kinesio taping on low back pain.
Writing – review & editing: Qiliang Lou. Capital Food Med 2015;22:85–7.
[20] Su B, Jia C, Yin C, et al. Clinical research on kinesio taping combined
with acupuncture for treating nonspecific chronic low back pain. Chin J
References Sports Med 2015;34:540–2.
[1] Suh JH, Kim H, Jung GP, et al. The effect of lumbar stabilization and [21] Song RJ, Dai ZL, Wei WU. Clinical research of balance acupuncture
walking exercises on chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled combined with Kinesio taping in the treamtet of chronic low back pain.
trial. Medicine (Baltimore) 2019;98:e16173. China Pract Med 2016;11:12–3.
[2] Qin J, Zhang Y, Wu L, et al. Effect of Tai Chi alone or as additional [22] Zhuang X, Chen Y, Ding YQ. Effect of Kinesio taping combined with
therapy on low back pain: Systematic review and meta-analysis of physiotherapy on chronic non-specific low back pain in the elderly. Pract
randomized controlled trials. Medicine (Baltimore) 2019;98:e17099. Geriatr 2019;892–4.
[3] Bai R, Li C, Xiao Y, et al. Effectiveness of spa therapy for patients with [23] Xu J, Wang ZM, Li K. Clinical observation of chronic nonspecific low
chronic low back pain: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis. back pain treated by massage combined with intramuscular adhesive.
Medicine (Baltimore) 2019;98:e17092. Hubei J TCM 2018;40:52–4.
[4] Al-Shareef AT, Omar MT, Ibrahim AH. Effect of Kinesio Taping on pain [24] Li Y, Yin Y, Jia G, et al. Effects of kinesiotape on pain and disability in
and functional disability in chronic nonspecific low back pain: A individuals with chronic low back pain: A systematic review and meta-
randomized clinical trial. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016;41:E821–8. analysis of randomized controlled trials. Clin Rehabil 2019;33:596–606.