Comment on “Effects of kinesiotaping versus non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and physical therapy for treatment of pes anserinus tendino-bursitis: a randomized comparative clinical trial”

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Deutscher übersetzter Titel:Kommentare zu „Auswirkungen des Kinesiotapings im Vergleich zu steroidfreien entzündungshemmenden Medikamenten und Physiotherapie zur Behandlung der Pes-anserinus-Tendino-Bursitis : ein randomisierter, klinischer Vergleichstest‟
Autor:Dandinoglu, Taner; Koç, Haydar Mert
Erschienen in:The physician and sportsmedicine
Veröffentlicht:44 (2016), 4, S. 342, Lit.
Format: Literatur (SPOLIT)
Publikationstyp: Zeitschriftenartikel
Medienart: Elektronische Ressource (online) Gedruckte Ressource
Sprache:Englisch
ISSN:0091-3847, 2326-3660
DOI:10.1080/00913847.2016.1230467
Schlagworte:
Online Zugang:
Erfassungsnummer:PU201807004723
Quelle:BISp

Abstract des Autors

In this report, the authors aimed to find out the effect and safety of kinesiotaping (KT) in comparison with physical therapy (PT) and Naproxen in the management of pes anserine bursitis (PAB). They have concluded that KT method was found more effective and safer than PT combined with Naproxen in PAB. It is clear that that result deserves significant attention and proves better understanding about KT’s effectiveness in PAB, but we want to ask some points that have been stuck in our mind. First, 46 patients (n = 27 in the KT group, n = 19 in PT combined with Naproxen group) were included and there was no control group in this study. In order to describe KT application’s possible effectiveness on PAB and to exclude Naproxen’s well-known anti-inflammatory effects, a group formed with no medication may be helpful. Moreover, clarifying PT interventions such as ‘cold pack and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for 15–20 minutes/day,’ may also help to understand study’s design better. In this study, visual analog scale (VAS) and swelling score (SS) (depth of the edematous area evaluated by ultrasound) were defined as main outcome parameters to compare the effects of KT and PT with Naproxen by the authors. At the end of the treatment, decreased VAS and improved SS were observed in both groups but favorable findings were reported with KT intervention. According to the text, KT application’s superiority to conventional therapy was probably associated with KT’s continuous influence on the knee during the patient’s daily activities. Because VAS and SS are not the exact parameters which help clinicians to evaluate effectiveness of a modality on daily life or functional activities during the day, we think that the favorable results with KT cannot be explained with its continuous influence. In addition, we cannot deny Naproxen’s ongoing effect during the day. To compare, understand or support KT interventions’ possible effects on functional or daily life activities, using Short Form 12/36, WOMAC, Berg balance scale, etc. may be helpful.