A Study Trial to compare two taping techniques to improve balance and walking in one side paralytic patients.

Not yet recruiting

Brief Summary: Many patients remain unable to walk or have difficulties with walking after stroke. More over loss of balance also contributes to impaired functional capacity of the patient. It has been reported that only a small proportion can walk with sufficient ability to function effectively within the community. The ability to walk correctly and maintain postural balance is a prerequisite for many daily activities. The rationale behind this study is that, despite the current use of Kinesio Taping as a part of clinical practice in physical therapy, its clinical effects on Functional balance and Gait ability have not been extensively studied. Kinesio taping has many advantages over rigid taping with regards to its application as it is less time consuming. Other advantages of the KT include low cost and easy application along with its prolonged effect relative to rigid taping. Moreover the time constraint of a particular session with the patient gives rise to the need of proper intervention which will be effective in improving functional balance and gait performance. Thus, this study aims to find out which treatment technique will be more beneficial to the patients aiming to achieve proper ambulation and functional balance, saving their time as well as giving a treatment best suited for their needs.

Recruitment & Eligibility

Inclusion Criteria

Patients diagnosed with hemiplegia due to hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke at > 6 months post-stroke 2.
Patients able to perform independent gait over 10 m without assistive devices 3.
Patients having spasticity in the affected side ankle (Modified Ashworth scale â‰¤ 1).

Exclusion Criteria

Patients having medical problems other than neurological lesions affecting gait 2.
Patients with bilaterally affected limbs 3.
Patients with known skin allergic reactions to taping 4.
Patients having premorbid or current orthopedic problem involving the lower extremities.

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
1. 10-m walk test in meters	1. Pre Intervention \| 2. Post Intervention \| 3. After 24 HRS Post Intervention \| For all outcome measures
2. Ink foot print method for stride length in meters	1. Pre Intervention \| 2. Post Intervention \| 3. After 24 HRS Post Intervention \| For all outcome measures
3. Cadence in number of steps per minute	1. Pre Intervention \| 2. Post Intervention \| 3. After 24 HRS Post Intervention \| For all outcome measures
4. Functional Reach test in centimeters	1. Pre Intervention \| 2. Post Intervention \| 3. After 24 HRS Post Intervention \| For all outcome measures
5. Time up and go test in seconds	1. Pre Intervention \| 2. Post Intervention \| 3. After 24 HRS Post Intervention \| For all outcome measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method

Locations (1): Sancheti Hospital
🇮🇳
Pune, MAHARASHTRA, India
Sancheti Hospital
🇮🇳Pune, MAHARASHTRA, India
Hayy Patni
Principal investigator
8097211598
hayy.patni@gmail.com