Accepted Manuscript Title: Effectiveness of neuromuscular taping on pronated foot posture and walking plantar pressures in amateur runners Author: Mar´ıa Bravo Aguilar Javier Abi´an-Vic´en Jill Halstead Gabriel Gijon-Nogueron PII: DOI: Reference:
S1440-2440(15)00086-9 http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2015.04.004 JSAMS 1168
To appear in:
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
Received date: Revised date: Accepted date:
23-9-2014 15-3-2015 8-4-2015
Please cite this article as: Aguilar MB, Abi´an-Vic´en J, Halstead J, Gijon-Nogueron G, Effectiveness of neuromuscular taping on pronated foot posture and walking plantar pressures in amateur runners, Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2015.04.004 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
1
Effectiveness of neuromuscular taping on pronated foot posture and walking plantar pressures in
2
amateur runners
3 4
María Bravo Aguilar1, Javier Abián-Vicén1, Jill Halstead2, Gabriel Gijon-Nogueron3
5 1 Camilo José Cela University. Exercise Physiology Laboratory, Madrid, Spain.
7
2 Section of Clinical Biomechanics and Physical Medicine, Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and
8
Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, UK
9
3 Department of Nursing and Podiatry. University of Málaga, Málaga, Spain.
cr
Short title: kinesiotaping to control pronated foot types.
12
us
10 11
ip t
6
Institutional Review Board that approved the protocol for the study: Medical Research Ethics
14
Committee of Faculty of Health Science, University of Malaga (ID: 07/2011)
an
13 15
All the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest derived from the outcomes of this study.
17 This study did not receive any funding
19
d
18
M
16
Corresponding author:
21
Gabriel Gijon-Nogueron, University of Malaga, Facultad Ciencias de la Salud,C/ Arquitecto
22
Fernando Peñalosa 3, Malaga - 29071, Spain
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Email: [email protected]
Ac ce p
te
20
Abstract:242 Main Document:2980 Figure 1 Table:2
1 Page 1 of 18
Abstract
30
Objectives: to determine the effect kinesiotaping (KT) versus sham kinesiotaping (sham KT)
31
in the repositioning of pronated feet after a short running.
32
Design: prospective, randomized, double-blinded, using a repeated-measures design with no
33
cross-over
34
Methods: 116 amateur runners were screened by assessing the post-run (45 minutes duration)
35
foot posture to identify pronated foot types (defined by Foot Posture Index [FPI] score of >6).
36
Seventy-three runners met the inclusion criteria and were allocated into two treatment groups,
37
KT (n=49) and sham KT (n=24). After applying either the KT or sham KT and completing 45
38
minutes of running (mean speed of 12 Km/h), outcome measures were collected (FPI and
39
walking Pedobarography).
40
Results: FPI was reduced in both groups, more so in the KT group (mean FPI between group
41
difference = 0.9, CI 0.1 to 1.9), with a score closer to neutral. There were statistically
42
significant differences between KT and sham KT (p< .05 and p45
110
minutes, a minimum of three times per week, or to practice sports more than 10 hours/week);
111
(ii) FPI defined pronated foot type defined as a score of 6 to 12; (ii) no foot or ankle injury
112
within the previous 6 months; (iv) no foot or ankle pain at the time of the study; (v) age
113
between 18 and 40 years; and (vi) able to provide informed, written consent. Exclusion
114
criteria were: (i) degenerative bone and joint diseases (diagnosed from medical history); (ii)
115
lower limb surgery; (iii) recent knee-ankle injuries or serious foot injury that could have left
116
morphological alterations; (iv) obvious leg length discrepancy; (v) loss of balance measured
117
with Romberg's test ; (vi) painful cutaneous conditions such as callus or plantar warts and
118
(vii) edema on foot-ankle articulation that may make difficult or mask any necessary details
119
for collecting the FPI. All procedures were approved by the Medical Research Ethics
120
Committee of Faculty of Health Science, University of Malaga (ID: 07/2011) and in
121
accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
Ac ce p
te
d
103
4 Page 4 of 18
At the screening session, all participants ran continuously for 45 minutes on a 9 km long
123
circuit, at a paced speed (5 minutes per kilometre) using a smart phone application (average
124
speed 12 km/h, standard deviation of 4.57 to 5.02). After the exercise, two assessors
125
measured the FPI (GGN) and plantar pressures (JAV). Both the FPI and plantar pressures
126
were analysed from the right foot only, to avoid selection bias and breaching assumptions of
127
statistical independence in bilateral limb studies17. Participants were randomised into the two
128
groups KT and sham KT using a manual method of flipping a coin. After screening,
129
participants who met the inclusion criteria (n=73) were invited back on a separate day to
130
assess the effect of KT upon FPI and walking pressures.
us
131
cr
ip t
122
The Foot Posture Index was assessed by a podiatrist (GGN) with an established high intra-
133
rater reliability of FPI scoring (Intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.91-0.98)14, who
134
was blinded to the purposes of the study and the participant’s identity. The FPI is a six-item
135
clinical assessment tool used to evaluate foot posture16, with an acceptable validity18 and
136
good intra-rater reliability (ICC = 0.893–0.958)19. The FPI evaluates the multi-segmental
137
nature of foot posture in all three planes, and does not require the use of specialised
138
equipment. Each item of the FPI is scored between -2 and +2, to give a total between -12
139
(highly supinated) and +12 (highly pronated). Items include: talar head palpation, curves
140
above and below the lateral malleoli, calcaneal angle, talonavicular bulge, medial
141
longitudinal arch, and forefoot to hindfoot alignment.
te
d
M
an
132
Ac ce p
142 143
Plantar pressure was assessed, using Biofoot (IBV, Valencia, Spain); an instrumented in-shoe
144
insole system over a period of 6 seconds20. This mobile system is commonly used in Spain as
145
a reliable means to capture and analyze walking in-shoe plantar pressures in healthy pain free
146
and foot pain groups (coefficient of variation between two sessions was around 7%, range:
147
4.6–9%) 20. The insoles contain 64 piezoelectric pressure sensors (sampling rate of 100Hz) of
148
0.5 mm thickness and 5 mm diameter calibrated according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
149
The participants were encouraged to acclimatize to the insoles, which were placed in the
150
participants own training shoe for both screening and intervention sessions.
151
Pressure measurements were taken while walking along a 20 meter line, in a single direction
152
and at a self selected walking speed. This procedure was followed for both walking trials. All
153
the participants were asked to walk normally, the measurements began during the middle of
154
the walkway without informing the participants to encourage natural gait. Six steps were
155
recorded and repeated three times, in order to obtain an average. In order to record and 5 Page 5 of 18
156
analyze data, specific software, Biofoot/IBV 6.0 (IBV, Valencia, Spain) was used to divide
157
the foot into 3 regions; hindfoot, midfoot, forefoot. The data were gathered and stored in a
158
computer using digital telemetry.
159
The anti-pronation KT was applied by a specialized sports physiotherapist (MBA) (un-
161
blinded) with more than 8 years of experience (see Figure 1). Kinesiotaping was applied
162
according to procedures recommended by Pijnappel et al.21 and using Low-Dye Taping
163
criteria of correction22. Standard 5cm Black Irisana©tape was used for both groups. The
164
taping had two parts: (i) The hindfoot: a single strip, 25 cm in length, was applied from the
165
fibula (lateral malleolus), around the calcaneus, with 75% stretch, to the middle third of the
166
medial tibia. (ii) The midfoot was applied from the base of the 5th metatarsal bone, cross the
167
talo-navicular joint and surrounding the midfoot, and ascending to reach the internal aspect of
168
the middle third of the tibial bone, also with 75% stretch. The first strip was applied with the
169
subject in supine and the hindfoot placed in a supinated position. The second strip was
170
applied with the subject in maximum supinated position following the direction described
171
before to finally place the foot in maximum dorsal flexion ending at the internal aspect of the
172
mid third of the tibial bone as shown in Figure 1. Once applied, the instructor warmed up the
173
KT strip by rubbing it three times from the fibula (malleolus) to the middle third of the tibia
174
in order to maximize tape adhesion.
te
d
M
an
us
cr
ip t
160
175
In order to simulate the experimental taping technique (KT) but without the mechanical
177
effect, the sham KT was applied in an identical manner but without tension and without any
178
mechanical correction in a similar protocol to a shoulder trial23. The sham KT was applied to
179
hindfoot, the first strip positioned the heel in neutral, a longer strip of tape (28 cm) was used
180
as the tape was not stretched. This resulted in the tape travelling the same distance on the
181
patient’s skin as the KT group, and enabled blinding of the participant and the outcome
182
assessor.
Ac ce p
176
183 184
Both the screening and intervention assessments were undertaken two days apart under the
185
same conditions (at the same time and place to avoid within day variation24) . Participants
186
repeated the same procedure as the first day (continuous running during 45 minutes). The
187
same assessors repeated both tests (FPI and plantar pressures) at screening and the
188
intervention appointments of participants after removing the kinesiotape. At the intervention
189
appointment, the FPI assessor was blinded by using a folding screen, which was placed 6 Page 6 of 18
190
between the subject and the assessor, and only the foot and 10 cm of shank were visible14.
191
Participants were assessed while in a relaxed standing position, on a bench 50 cm tall to
192
enable visual and manual inspection.
193
SPSS v. 19.0 program (IBM Inc., USA) was used to perform the statistical calculations using
195
descriptive and inferential statistical tests. The pressure data was tested for normality by
196
using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, set at a significance level of p
S1440-2440(15)00086-9 http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.jsams.2015.04.004 JSAMS 1168
To appear in:
Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
Received date: Revised date: Accepted date:
23-9-2014 15-3-2015 8-4-2015
Please cite this article as: Aguilar MB, Abi´an-Vic´en J, Halstead J, Gijon-Nogueron G, Effectiveness of neuromuscular taping on pronated foot posture and walking plantar pressures in amateur runners, Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport (2015), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsams.2015.04.004 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
1
Effectiveness of neuromuscular taping on pronated foot posture and walking plantar pressures in
2
amateur runners
3 4
María Bravo Aguilar1, Javier Abián-Vicén1, Jill Halstead2, Gabriel Gijon-Nogueron3
5 1 Camilo José Cela University. Exercise Physiology Laboratory, Madrid, Spain.
7
2 Section of Clinical Biomechanics and Physical Medicine, Leeds Institute of Rheumatic and
8
Musculoskeletal Medicine, University of Leeds, UK
9
3 Department of Nursing and Podiatry. University of Málaga, Málaga, Spain.
cr
Short title: kinesiotaping to control pronated foot types.
12
us
10 11
ip t
6
Institutional Review Board that approved the protocol for the study: Medical Research Ethics
14
Committee of Faculty of Health Science, University of Malaga (ID: 07/2011)
an
13 15
All the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest derived from the outcomes of this study.
17 This study did not receive any funding
19
d
18
M
16
Corresponding author:
21
Gabriel Gijon-Nogueron, University of Malaga, Facultad Ciencias de la Salud,C/ Arquitecto
22
Fernando Peñalosa 3, Malaga - 29071, Spain
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Email: [email protected]
Ac ce p
te
20
Abstract:242 Main Document:2980 Figure 1 Table:2
1 Page 1 of 18
Abstract
30
Objectives: to determine the effect kinesiotaping (KT) versus sham kinesiotaping (sham KT)
31
in the repositioning of pronated feet after a short running.
32
Design: prospective, randomized, double-blinded, using a repeated-measures design with no
33
cross-over
34
Methods: 116 amateur runners were screened by assessing the post-run (45 minutes duration)
35
foot posture to identify pronated foot types (defined by Foot Posture Index [FPI] score of >6).
36
Seventy-three runners met the inclusion criteria and were allocated into two treatment groups,
37
KT (n=49) and sham KT (n=24). After applying either the KT or sham KT and completing 45
38
minutes of running (mean speed of 12 Km/h), outcome measures were collected (FPI and
39
walking Pedobarography).
40
Results: FPI was reduced in both groups, more so in the KT group (mean FPI between group
41
difference = 0.9, CI 0.1 to 1.9), with a score closer to neutral. There were statistically
42
significant differences between KT and sham KT (p< .05 and p45
110
minutes, a minimum of three times per week, or to practice sports more than 10 hours/week);
111
(ii) FPI defined pronated foot type defined as a score of 6 to 12; (ii) no foot or ankle injury
112
within the previous 6 months; (iv) no foot or ankle pain at the time of the study; (v) age
113
between 18 and 40 years; and (vi) able to provide informed, written consent. Exclusion
114
criteria were: (i) degenerative bone and joint diseases (diagnosed from medical history); (ii)
115
lower limb surgery; (iii) recent knee-ankle injuries or serious foot injury that could have left
116
morphological alterations; (iv) obvious leg length discrepancy; (v) loss of balance measured
117
with Romberg's test ; (vi) painful cutaneous conditions such as callus or plantar warts and
118
(vii) edema on foot-ankle articulation that may make difficult or mask any necessary details
119
for collecting the FPI. All procedures were approved by the Medical Research Ethics
120
Committee of Faculty of Health Science, University of Malaga (ID: 07/2011) and in
121
accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
Ac ce p
te
d
103
4 Page 4 of 18
At the screening session, all participants ran continuously for 45 minutes on a 9 km long
123
circuit, at a paced speed (5 minutes per kilometre) using a smart phone application (average
124
speed 12 km/h, standard deviation of 4.57 to 5.02). After the exercise, two assessors
125
measured the FPI (GGN) and plantar pressures (JAV). Both the FPI and plantar pressures
126
were analysed from the right foot only, to avoid selection bias and breaching assumptions of
127
statistical independence in bilateral limb studies17. Participants were randomised into the two
128
groups KT and sham KT using a manual method of flipping a coin. After screening,
129
participants who met the inclusion criteria (n=73) were invited back on a separate day to
130
assess the effect of KT upon FPI and walking pressures.
us
131
cr
ip t
122
The Foot Posture Index was assessed by a podiatrist (GGN) with an established high intra-
133
rater reliability of FPI scoring (Intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.91-0.98)14, who
134
was blinded to the purposes of the study and the participant’s identity. The FPI is a six-item
135
clinical assessment tool used to evaluate foot posture16, with an acceptable validity18 and
136
good intra-rater reliability (ICC = 0.893–0.958)19. The FPI evaluates the multi-segmental
137
nature of foot posture in all three planes, and does not require the use of specialised
138
equipment. Each item of the FPI is scored between -2 and +2, to give a total between -12
139
(highly supinated) and +12 (highly pronated). Items include: talar head palpation, curves
140
above and below the lateral malleoli, calcaneal angle, talonavicular bulge, medial
141
longitudinal arch, and forefoot to hindfoot alignment.
te
d
M
an
132
Ac ce p
142 143
Plantar pressure was assessed, using Biofoot (IBV, Valencia, Spain); an instrumented in-shoe
144
insole system over a period of 6 seconds20. This mobile system is commonly used in Spain as
145
a reliable means to capture and analyze walking in-shoe plantar pressures in healthy pain free
146
and foot pain groups (coefficient of variation between two sessions was around 7%, range:
147
4.6–9%) 20. The insoles contain 64 piezoelectric pressure sensors (sampling rate of 100Hz) of
148
0.5 mm thickness and 5 mm diameter calibrated according to the manufacturer’s instructions.
149
The participants were encouraged to acclimatize to the insoles, which were placed in the
150
participants own training shoe for both screening and intervention sessions.
151
Pressure measurements were taken while walking along a 20 meter line, in a single direction
152
and at a self selected walking speed. This procedure was followed for both walking trials. All
153
the participants were asked to walk normally, the measurements began during the middle of
154
the walkway without informing the participants to encourage natural gait. Six steps were
155
recorded and repeated three times, in order to obtain an average. In order to record and 5 Page 5 of 18
156
analyze data, specific software, Biofoot/IBV 6.0 (IBV, Valencia, Spain) was used to divide
157
the foot into 3 regions; hindfoot, midfoot, forefoot. The data were gathered and stored in a
158
computer using digital telemetry.
159
The anti-pronation KT was applied by a specialized sports physiotherapist (MBA) (un-
161
blinded) with more than 8 years of experience (see Figure 1). Kinesiotaping was applied
162
according to procedures recommended by Pijnappel et al.21 and using Low-Dye Taping
163
criteria of correction22. Standard 5cm Black Irisana©tape was used for both groups. The
164
taping had two parts: (i) The hindfoot: a single strip, 25 cm in length, was applied from the
165
fibula (lateral malleolus), around the calcaneus, with 75% stretch, to the middle third of the
166
medial tibia. (ii) The midfoot was applied from the base of the 5th metatarsal bone, cross the
167
talo-navicular joint and surrounding the midfoot, and ascending to reach the internal aspect of
168
the middle third of the tibial bone, also with 75% stretch. The first strip was applied with the
169
subject in supine and the hindfoot placed in a supinated position. The second strip was
170
applied with the subject in maximum supinated position following the direction described
171
before to finally place the foot in maximum dorsal flexion ending at the internal aspect of the
172
mid third of the tibial bone as shown in Figure 1. Once applied, the instructor warmed up the
173
KT strip by rubbing it three times from the fibula (malleolus) to the middle third of the tibia
174
in order to maximize tape adhesion.
te
d
M
an
us
cr
ip t
160
175
In order to simulate the experimental taping technique (KT) but without the mechanical
177
effect, the sham KT was applied in an identical manner but without tension and without any
178
mechanical correction in a similar protocol to a shoulder trial23. The sham KT was applied to
179
hindfoot, the first strip positioned the heel in neutral, a longer strip of tape (28 cm) was used
180
as the tape was not stretched. This resulted in the tape travelling the same distance on the
181
patient’s skin as the KT group, and enabled blinding of the participant and the outcome
182
assessor.
Ac ce p
176
183 184
Both the screening and intervention assessments were undertaken two days apart under the
185
same conditions (at the same time and place to avoid within day variation24) . Participants
186
repeated the same procedure as the first day (continuous running during 45 minutes). The
187
same assessors repeated both tests (FPI and plantar pressures) at screening and the
188
intervention appointments of participants after removing the kinesiotape. At the intervention
189
appointment, the FPI assessor was blinded by using a folding screen, which was placed 6 Page 6 of 18
190
between the subject and the assessor, and only the foot and 10 cm of shank were visible14.
191
Participants were assessed while in a relaxed standing position, on a bench 50 cm tall to
192
enable visual and manual inspection.
193
SPSS v. 19.0 program (IBM Inc., USA) was used to perform the statistical calculations using
195
descriptive and inferential statistical tests. The pressure data was tested for normality by
196
using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, set at a significance level of p
