Phys. Ther. Korea 2022; 29(1): 19-27
Published online February 20, 2022
https://doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2022.29.1.19
© Korean Research Society of Physical Therapy
임진구1, 김선엽2
1대전대학교 대학원 물리치료학과, 2대전대학교 보건의료과학대학 물리치료학과
Jin-gu Im1 , PT, BHSc, Suhn-yeop Kim2 , PT, PhD
1Department of Physical Therapy, Graduate School, Daejeon University, 2Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health and Medical Science, Daejeon University, Daejeon, Korea
Correspondence to: Suhn-yeop Kim
E-mail: kimsy@dju.kr
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0558-7125
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Background: Foot drop is a common symptom in stroke patients. Tape applications are widely used to manage foot drop symptoms. Previous studies have evaluated the effects of static and dynamic balance and gait on foot drop using kinesiology tape; however, only few studies have used dynamic tape application in stroke patients with foot drop.
Objects: The purpose of this study was to investigate the immediate effects of dynamic taping, which facilitates the dorsiflexor muscle, on static and dynamic balance and gait speed in stroke patients with foot drop.
Methods: The study included 34 voluntary patients (17 men, 17 women) with stroke. The patients were randomly assigned to the experimental group (n = 17), wherein dynamic taping was used to facilitate the dorsiflexor muscle, or the control group (n = 17), wherein kinesiology taping was used. Before the taping application, velocity average, path-length average, Berg balance scale, and timed up and go test (TUG) were recorded to measure static and dynamic balance, whereas the 10-meter walk test (10MWT) was used to measure gait speed. After the taping application, these parameters were re-evaluated in both groups. Repeated measure analysis of variance was used. Statistical significance levels were set to α = 0.05.
Results: Except for the 10MWT scores in the control group, significant differences were noted in all the parameters measured for static and dynamic balance and gait speed between the pre and post-test (p < 0.05). However, the parameters showed significant interaction effects between group and time in the TUG and 10MWT (p < 0.01).
Conclusion: These results indicate that compared with kinesiology taping, dynamic taping used in chronic stroke patients with foot drop had a more significant effect on dynamic balance and gait speed.
Keywords: Ankle dorsiflexor,Balance,Dynamic taping,Foot drop,Gait speed,Stroke
Phys. Ther. Korea 2022; 29(1): 19-27
Published online February 20, 2022 https://doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2022.29.1.19
Copyright © Korean Research Society of Physical Therapy.
임진구1, 김선엽2
1대전대학교 대학원 물리치료학과, 2대전대학교 보건의료과학대학 물리치료학과
Jin-gu Im1 , PT, BHSc, Suhn-yeop Kim2 , PT, PhD
1Department of Physical Therapy, Graduate School, Daejeon University, 2Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health and Medical Science, Daejeon University, Daejeon, Korea
Correspondence to:Suhn-yeop Kim
E-mail: kimsy@dju.kr
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0558-7125
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Background: Foot drop is a common symptom in stroke patients. Tape applications are widely used to manage foot drop symptoms. Previous studies have evaluated the effects of static and dynamic balance and gait on foot drop using kinesiology tape; however, only few studies have used dynamic tape application in stroke patients with foot drop.
Objects: The purpose of this study was to investigate the immediate effects of dynamic taping, which facilitates the dorsiflexor muscle, on static and dynamic balance and gait speed in stroke patients with foot drop.
Methods: The study included 34 voluntary patients (17 men, 17 women) with stroke. The patients were randomly assigned to the experimental group (n = 17), wherein dynamic taping was used to facilitate the dorsiflexor muscle, or the control group (n = 17), wherein kinesiology taping was used. Before the taping application, velocity average, path-length average, Berg balance scale, and timed up and go test (TUG) were recorded to measure static and dynamic balance, whereas the 10-meter walk test (10MWT) was used to measure gait speed. After the taping application, these parameters were re-evaluated in both groups. Repeated measure analysis of variance was used. Statistical significance levels were set to α = 0.05.
Results: Except for the 10MWT scores in the control group, significant differences were noted in all the parameters measured for static and dynamic balance and gait speed between the pre and post-test (p < 0.05). However, the parameters showed significant interaction effects between group and time in the TUG and 10MWT (p < 0.01).
Conclusion: These results indicate that compared with kinesiology taping, dynamic taping used in chronic stroke patients with foot drop had a more significant effect on dynamic balance and gait speed.
Keywords: Ankle dorsiflexor,Balance,Dynamic taping,Foot drop,Gait speed,Stroke
Table 1 . General characteristics of subjects.
Variables | Experimental group (n = 17) | Control group (n = 17) | t/χ2 | p-value |
---|---|---|---|---|
Age (y) | 62.76 ± 8.79 | 65.41 ± 11.01 | –0.775 | 0.444 |
Gender (man/woman) | 8/9 | 9/8 | 0.118 | 0.732 |
Type of stroke (hemorrhage/ischemic) | 7/10 | 8/9 | 0.119 | 0.730 |
Paretic side (right/left) | 10/7 | 6/11 | 1.889 | 0.169 |
Onset time (mo) | 12.12 ± 3.94 | 10.82 ± 2.46 | 1.150 | 0.259 |
Height (cm) | 162.65 ± 7.85 | 163.76 ± 9.37 | –0.377 | 0.709 |
Weight (kg) | 64.87 ± 8.20 | 64.39 ± 9.87 | 0.153 | 0.879 |
Body mass index (kg/m2) | 24.56 ± 3.05 | 23.93 ± 2.12 | 0.698 | 0.490 |
Values are presented as number only or mean ± standard deviation..
Table 2 . Comparison of changes in static and dynamic balance between the groups at the time of measurement.
Variables | Experimental group (n = 17) | Control group (n = 17) | t (p) | F (p) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Velocity average (cm/s) | Pre | 2.91 ± 0.49 | 3.04 ± 0.47 | –0.821 (0.418) | 0.014a (0.905) |
Post | 2.71 ± 0.43 | 2.85 ± 0.43 | –0.983 (0.333) | ||
t (p) | 3.324 (0.004) | 3.656 (0.002) | |||
Path-length average (cm) | Pre | 87.18 ± 14.73 | 91.25 ± 14.19 | –0.821 (0.418) | 0.014 (0.905) |
Post | 81.29 ± 13.00 | 85.64 ± 12.82 | –0.983 (0.333) | ||
t (p) | 3.324 (0.004) | 3.656 (0.002) | |||
Berg balance scale (score) | Pre | 40.71 ± 7.56 | 36.82 ± 8.55 | 1.403 (0.170) | 0.088 (0.769) |
Post | 41.59 ± 7.32 | 37.59 ± 8.56 | 1.464 (0.153) | ||
t (p) | –2.985 (0.009) | –2.889 (0.011) | |||
Timed up and go test (s) | Pre | 33.40 ± 13.52 | 29.52 ± 12.27 | 0.877 (0.387) | 17.494 (< 0.001) |
Post | 30.12 ± 11.94 | 28.74 ± 12.74 | 0.325 (0.747) | ||
t (p) | 6.154 (< 0.001) | 2.853 (0.012) |
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation. aGroup × time..
Table 3 . Comparison of changes in gait speed between the groups at the time of measurement.
Variables | Experimental group (n = 17) | Control group (n = 17) | t (p) | F (p) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
10-meter walk test (m/s) | Pre | 0.38 ± 0.19 | 0.47 ± 0.23 | –1.244 (0.223) | 11.942a (0.002) |
Post | 0.42 ± 0.23 | 0.47 ± 0.23 | –0.626 (0.536) | ||
t (p) | –4.214 (0.001) | –1.397 (0.182) |
Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation. aGroup × time..