TEMPORAL PATTERN OF KINESIOLOGY TAPE EFFICACY ON HAMSTRING EXTENSIBILITY

Background

Kinesiology tape has been advocated as a means of improving muscle flexibility, a potential modifiable risk factor for injury, over time. The epidemiology and etiology of hamstring injuries in sport have been well documented.

Purpose

To compare the temporal pattern of efficacy of kinesiology tape and traditional stretching techniques on hamstring extensibility over a five day period.

Study Design

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods

Thirty recreationally active male participants (Mean ± SD: age 20.0 ± 1.55 years; height 179.3 ± 4.94 cm; mass 76.9 ± 7.57 kg) completed an active knee extension assessment (of the dominant leg) as a measure of hamstring extensibility. Three experimental interventions were applied in randomized order: Kinesiology tape (KT), static stretch (SS), proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF). Measures were taken at baseline, +1min, + 30mins, + 3days and +5days days after each intervention. The temporal pattern of change in active knee extension was modelled as a range of regression polynomials for each intervention, quantified as the regression coefficient.

Results

Hamstring ROM with KT application at +3days was significantly greater than baseline (129.18 ± 15.46%, p = 0.01), SS (106.99 ± 9.84%, p = 0.03) and PNF (107.42 ± 136.13%, p = 0.03) interventions. The temporal pattern of changes in ROM for SS and PNF were best modelled by a negative linear function, although the strength of the correlation was weak in each case. In contrast, the KT data was optimised using a quadratic polynomial function (r² = 0.60), which yielded an optimum time of 2.76 days, eliciting a predicted ROM of 129.6% relative to baseline.

Conclusion

Each intervention displayed a unique temporal pattern of changes in active knee extension. SS was best suited to immediate improvements, and PNF to +30 minutes in hamstring extensibility, whereas kinesiology tape offered advantages over a longer duration, peaking at 2.76 days. These findings have implications for the choice of intervention, timing and duration to assist clinicians in both a sporting and clinical context.

Level of evidence

2c