The Efficacy and Treatment Fidelity of Kinesiology Taping in Conjunction With Conservative Treatment Interventions Among Individuals With Shoulder Pain: A Systematic Review with Meta- Analysis.

Purpose Kinesiology taping is a common intervention used to treat individuals with shoulder pain. While there have been several studies published to date evaluating the effectiveness of this intervention, a systematic review with meta-analysis synthesizing the collective effectiveness of kinesiology taping is not available. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review with meta-analysis investigating the efficacy and treatment fidelity of kinesiology taping (KT) in combination with conservative interventions for shoulder pain. Methods Databases (PubMed, EMBASE, SportDiscus, CINAHL) of studies published in English meeting criteria were searched to October 2019. Methodologic quality was assessed utilizing the Modified Downs and Black checklist. Treatment fidelity was evaluated using a modified fidelity tool. Random effects meta-analyses were performed when an outcome (disability, pain, range of motion (ROM)) was reported by two or more studies. Overall effect size (pooled random effects) was estimated for studies with acceptable clinical homogeneity. Results When KT was used with conservative treatments, meta-analysis revealed large effect sizes for improvements in disability (standard mean difference (SMD) = -1.35; 95% CI, -2.09 to -0.60) and ROM (SMD = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.60-1.33) with no significant effects for pain. The average Modified Downs & Black score for bias was 11.5 ± 3.9. Of 10 retained studies, only two had good treatment fidelity. Conclusions Adding KT to interventions performed in clinical settings appears to demonstrate efficacy regarding disability and ROM when compared to conservative interventions alone. However, despite reasonably good methodologic quality, fidelity was lacking in a majority of studies. Because of its impact on the implementation of evidence-based practice, lower fidelity should be considered when interpreting results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]