Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain! trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 523 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

My blog is not to help survivors recover, it is to have the 10 million yearly stroke survivors light fires underneath their doctors, stroke hospitals and stroke researchers to get stroke solved. 100% recovery. The stroke medical world is completely failing at that goal, they don't even have it as a goal. Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It lays out what needs to be done to get stroke survivors closer to 100% recovery. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.

Saturday, April 18, 2026

Effectiveness and clinical relevance of kinesio taping in musculoskeletal disorders: an overview of systematic reviews and evidence mapping

I had kinesiology tape on my shoulder. No clue why except it allowed another PT to treat me.  

To summarize, elastic therapeutic taping seeks to improve blood flow and drainage by lifting the skin to create separation between the muscle and dermis layers. Then there is this from 2006. 

Kinesio taping in stroke: improving functional use of the upper extremity in hemiplegia

And this from May 2019;

Systematic Review on Effectiveness of shoulder taping in Hemiplegia

The latest here: Ask for EXACT PROOF IT WORKS!

Effectiveness and clinical relevance of kinesio taping in musculoskeletal disorders: an overview of systematic reviews and evidence mapping


  1. Qingcong Mo1,2
  2. Zhenmeng Deng1
  3. Jialing Zheng3
  4. Tong Wu4
  5. Fangfei Hu2
  6. Siqi Xu5
  7. Jihua Zou1,6
  8. Xiaoyan Zheng1
  1. Correspondence to Dr Xiaoyan Zheng; zhengxiaoyan181@126.com; Professor Jihua Zou; zoujihua@smu.edu.cn

Abstract

Objectives To investigate the effectiveness and clinical relevance of kinesio taping (KT) in musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) at different follow-ups.

Design Overview of systematic reviews (SRs) and evidence mapping.

Information sources Ten electronic databases were searched for SRs published from inception to 31 December 2024, and updated on 15 October 2025.

Eligibility criteria SRs with and without meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were eligible for inclusion if they compared KT with interventions other than KT (eg, active interventions, no tape, placebo/sham KT) in participants with MSDs.

Main outcome measures The primary outcomes were pain intensity, function/disability, range of motion, muscle strength, quality of life and disease-specific symptoms. The secondary outcome was adverse events (AEs).

Results A total of 128 SRs (73 published SRs and 55 registered yet unpublished SRs) involving 15 812 participants from 310 unique RCTs were included. Substantial SRs were focused on lower extremity conditions (45%) and reported pain intensity (89%). Most SRs were evaluated as critically low (78%) in methodological quality and low (58%) in risk of bias, with a median total compliance rate of 75.6% in reporting quality. Findings from new meta-analyses indicated that KT may reduce pain intensity in the immediate (Hedges’ g −0.69, 95% CI −0.81 to −0.57) and short (Hedges’ g −0.57, 95% CI −0.77 to −0.37) term and improve function/disability (Hedges’ g −0.54, 95% CI −0.69 to −0.40) in the immediate term. These effect estimates may achieve the predefined minimal clinically important difference of 0.5 SD (medium effect size). KT may show little to no effect on pain intensity in the medium term, function/disability in the short and medium term, muscle strength, range of motion, disease-specific symptoms at all follow-ups. The effects of KT may vary across subgroups or conditions, and its impact on quality of life is unclear. AEs related to KT mainly included skin irritation (number needed to harm (NNH) 173) and pruritus (NNH 356). All evidence was highly inconclusive due to very low certainty (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation), non-significant level (evidence level) and unstable clinical relevance across most outcomes.

Conclusions Current evidence is very uncertain regarding the clinical effects of KT on MSDs. Considerable heterogeneity, unclear clinical relevance and potential AEs may limit its application in clinical practice. Further high-quality, well-reported RCTs and SRs are warranted to address the uncertainty regarding overall effects along with comprehensive consideration of heterogeneity in KT usage.

PROSPERO registration number CRD42024517528.

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. Not applicable.

No comments:

Post a Comment