Effect of Kinesiology Taping in addition to Splint Therapy on Pain, Functional Condition, and Hand Grip Strength in Patients with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate the effects of added kinesiology taping treatment on pain, functional status, and hand grip strength in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Material and Methods: Eighty patients aged 18 years and over who were diagnosed with mild to moderate CTS by physical examination and electrophysiological findings were included in the study. Of these, 16 (20%) were males and 64 (80%) were females. Visual analogue scale (VAS), Boston KTS Questionnaire (BCTQ) and hydraulic hand dynamometer (Jamar) scores were used for the evaluation. The patients were randomly divided into two groups as splint (S) and Splint+Kinesiotape (SKT) treatment groups. Patients in the S group only received a volar-assisted splint in the neutral position. The patients were asked to wear the splints, especially during the night for three weeks. The SKT group was treated with kinesiology taping in addition to splinting. The taping process was repeated by the same person twice a week for three weeks. Results: The mean age of the patients was 47.0±11.4 for the S group and 50.2 ± 11.9 for the SKT group. In both groups, VAS, BCTQ-symptom severity scale (SSS), functional capacity scale (FDS), and hand dynamometer (kgf) measurements were statistically significant at three weeks post-treatment (p<0.01). No statistically significant differences were found between the groups in terms of VAS, BCTQ-SSS, BCTQ-FDS and hand dynamometer scores (p>0.05). Conclusion: In the conservative treatment of CTS, splint therapy has been shown to have a positive effect on VAS, BCTQ-SSS, BCTQ-FDS, and hand muscle strength. The superiority of splint therapy with kinesio taping, over splint therapy alone could not be demonstrated in the short-term.

Short‐term effectiveness of kinesio taping as therapeutic tool in conservative treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…Thirteen studies (Akgol et al., 2021; Aktürk et al., 2018; Ali et al., 2013; Aminian‐Far et al., 2021; de Sire et al., 2021; Geler Külcü et al., 2016; Kocjan, 2016; Krause et al., 2021; Mansiz Kaplan et al., 2019; Park et al., 2017; Yildirim et al., 2018; Öncü et al., 2014; Şen et al., 2020) analysed the influence of kinesio taping on symptoms of CTS (Figure 1). The articles were published between 2013 and 2021, all of them were randomised clinical trials, and were carried out in five different countries: Italy, Iran, Korea, Poland, Egypt, Turkey, and the United States of America.…”

“…Eleven of the 13 included studies used the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (Akgol et al., 2021; Aktürk et al., 2018; Aminian‐Far et al., 2021; de Sire et al., 2021; Geler Külcü et al., 2016; Kocjan, 2016; Krause et al., 2021; Mansiz Kaplan et al., 2019; Yildirim et al., 2018; Öncü et al., 2014; Şen et al., 2020), a specific questionnaire for CTS that assesses both functionality and severity, while two studies evaluated these two variables using the Quick Version of Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (de Sire et al., 2021; Kocjan, 2016). Finally, two studies evaluated the functional status of the hand (manual dexterity) via the Moberg pick‐up test (Yildirim et al., 2018; Öncü et al., 2014), whose use in CTS has been validated.…”

“…Pain intensity was assessed in eight studies. Two of these used the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (de Sire et al., 2021; Krause et al., 2021) while all of them employed a visual analogue scale (Akgol et al., 2021; Ali et al., 2013; de Sire et al., 2021; Geler Külcü et al., 2016; Kocjan, 2016; Krause et al., 2021; Mansiz Kaplan et al., 2019; Şen et al., 2020). The Doleur Neuropathique four questions (Akgol et al., 2021; Geler Külcü et al., 2016) for neuropathic pain was also employed in two studies.…”

“…Studies diagnosed CTS through different tests such as a compression test, Phalen's test (Aktürk et al., 2018; Ali et al., 2013; Geler Külcü et al., 2016; Öncü et al., 2014; Şen et al., 2020), or Tinel's sign (Aktürk et al., 2018; Ali et al., 2013; Geler Külcü et al., 2016; Öncü et al., 2014; Şen et al., 2020). Two studies analysed the effect of kinesio taping on these tests: Aktürk et al., 2018 found a significant decrease ( p < 0.001) in the response to provocative tests in the kinesio taping group versus a group where splints were used, while the study by Şen Nadide (2020) only recorded the results of the pre‐treatment evaluation.…”

“…Studies diagnosed CTS through different tests such as a compression test, Phalen's test (Aktürk et al., 2018; Ali et al., 2013; Geler Külcü et al., 2016; Öncü et al., 2014; Şen et al., 2020), or Tinel's sign (Aktürk et al., 2018; Ali et al., 2013; Geler Külcü et al., 2016; Öncü et al., 2014; Şen et al., 2020). Two studies analysed the effect of kinesio taping on these tests: Aktürk et al., 2018 found a significant decrease ( p < 0.001) in the response to provocative tests in the kinesio taping group versus a group where splints were used, while the study by Şen Nadide (2020) only recorded the results of the pre‐treatment evaluation. Additionally, different neurophysiological outcomes were used to test for CTS, such as the distal motor latency in seven studies (Akgol et al., 2021; Aktürk et al., 2018; Ali et al., 2013; Aminian‐Far et al., 2021; Mansiz Kaplan et al., 2019; Park et al., 2017; Öncü et al., 2014), proximal motor latency in one study (Mansiz Kaplan et al., 2019), sensory distal latency in four studies (Aktürk et al., 2018; Ali et al., 2013; Aminian‐Far et al., 2021; Öncü et al., 2014), compound motor action potential amplitude in three studies (Akgol et al., 2021; Park et al., 2017; Şen et al., 2020), sensory action potential amplitude in one study (Park et al., 2017), motor conduction velocity in three studies (Akgol et al., 2021; Mansiz Kaplan et al., 2019; Park et al., 2017), and sensory conduction velocity in five studies (Akgol et al., 2021; Aktürk et al., 2018; Aminian‐Far et al., 2021; Park et al., 2017; Öncü et al., 2014).…”