Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT07431450
NCT07431450
Completed
Not Applicable

Investigation of the Effects of Corrective Dynamic Taping Combined With Kinesio Taping on Balance, Agility, and Weight-Bearing Characteristics in Individuals With Excessive Subtalar Pronation

Gazi University1 site in 1 country20 target enrollmentStarted: June 1, 2024Last updated:

Overview

Phase
Not Applicable
Status
Completed
Enrollment
20
Locations
1
Primary Endpoint
Balance Assessment

Overview

Brief Summary

Subtalar pronation (SP) is a common foot alignment problem. It can disturb the normal movement of the ankle and affect different physical functions.

In clinics, taping is often used both to correct the foot position and to help the muscles work more effectively.

However, there are no studies examining the combined effect of corrective dynamic taping and kinesio taping in people with SP.

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of these two taping methods on balance, agility, and weight transfer in individuals with SP.

In this study, 10 people with SP were included in the treatment group and 10 people with SP were included in the control group.

Assessments were performed before taping and 45 minutes after the application. The results were statistically compared both within each group and between the groups.

Detailed Description

Subtalar pronation (SP) is one of the most common alignment disorders of the foot.

Subtalar pronation disrupts ankle biomechanics and leads to alterations in various physical parameters.

In clinical practice, taping techniques are frequently preferred in SP both for mechanical correction and for muscular facilitation or inhibition.

However, a review of the literature revealed no study investigating the effects of corrective dynamic taping combined with kinesio taping on SP.

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of corrective dynamic taping combined with kinesio taping on balance, agility, and weight-transfer characteristics in individuals with SP.

Within the scope of the study, 10 individuals with SP were included in the intervention group and 10 individuals with SP were included in the control group.

Assessments were performed before taping and 45 minutes after the intervention. The assessment results were statistically compared both between groups and within groups.

Study Design

Study Type
Interventional
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention Model
Parallel
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Masking
Double (Participant, Outcomes Assessor)

Masking Description

Patients were not informed about which taping method was applied. The assessor was also blinded to the type of taping used for each patient.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages
18 Years to 35 Years (Adult)
Sex
All
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Yes

Inclusion Criteria

  • Aged between 18 and 35 years
  • Having subtalar pronation according to the Foot Posture Index

Exclusion Criteria

  • Presence of any other lower extremity orthopedic disorder besides subtalar pronation
  • Presence of any chronic disease
  • History of any surgery
  • Leg length discrepancy greater than 3 cm
  • Complaint of lower extremity pain
  • History of lower extremity trauma within the last week

Arms & Interventions

Kinesio Taping

Active Comparator

A group of individuals who underwent Kinesio Taping.

Intervention: Kinesio taping (Other)

Dynamic Taping with Kinesio Taping

Experimental

A group of individuals who underwent Kinesio Taping combined with Corrective Dynamic Taping.

Intervention: Kinesio Taping combined with Corrective Dynamic Taping. (Other)

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Balance Assessment

Time Frame: 45 minutes

Balance was assessed quantitatively using posturography, which is considered the gold standard method in the literature. This method provides quantitative data on balance by measuring the amount of center of pressure sway while the individual is standing. The K-Force® force platform was used for the quantitative evaluation of balance, as it is a valid and reliable measurement device for balance assessment. During the static test, participants were asked to stand still for 30 seconds, and three trials were recorded. During the dynamic test, participants were asked to jump onto the platform from a height of 30 cm. Dynamic balance was evaluated based on the participant's ability to stabilize and recover balance after landing.

4 × 10 m Shuttle Test

Time Frame: 45 minutes

Speed and agility were assessed using the 4 × 10 m shuttle run test. Two parallel lines were marked on the floor 10 meters apart. Participants were asked to run back and forth between the lines as fast as possible, crossing each line with both feet and covering a total distance of 40 meters (4 × 10 m). A BlazePod® device was placed at each end, and participants were required to touch the device and return at maximum speed. The test was performed twice, and the best result was recorded.

T-Test

Time Frame: 45 minutes

The T-test consists of four contact points arranged in a T-shape within an area measuring 10 meters in length and 10 meters in width. The aim is for participants to complete a movement sequence between these points in the shortest possible time, requiring changes of direction in different ways. Direction changes are performed by shuffling to the right and left or by running backward. The test includes two 90° turns and one 180° turn, and requires participants to cover a total distance of 40 meters: 10 meters forward, 10 meters to the right, 10 meters to the left, and 10 meters backward.

Secondary Outcomes

  • Foot Posture Index(45 minutes)
  • Weight Transfer Assessment(45 minutes)

Investigators

Sponsor Class
Other
Responsible Party
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigator

Mustafa Can Salamci

Principal Investigator

Gazi University

Study Sites (1)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials