Effects of Dynamic Taping on Dynamic Balance and Proprioception in Recreational Athletes with Chronic Ankle Instability.
Yun-Chi Chang, Po-Tsun Chen, Wei-Jie Hsu and 1 others
Dynamic taping improved dynamic balance scores in recreational athletes with chronic ankle instability; sports taping did not.
Both tapes reduced proprioceptive error equally. Effects were measured 15 minutes after application only.
Key findings
1A significant group-by-time interaction was found for dynamic balance scores (F = 20.42, p < 0.05, η² = 0.440). The DT group's DB score dropped from 87.38 to 64.64, while the ST group's went from 81.20 to 76.21. The within-group improvement was significant only for the DT group.
2Joint position sense error decreased significantly in both groups (within-subject F = 49.54, p < 0.001), but there was no significant difference between the two taping methods (interaction F = 0.847, p = 0.366, η² = 0.032).
3The significant interaction for dynamic balance was also present for its two components: landing error (F = 111.61, p < 0.05, η² = 0.309) and balance error (F = 8.845, p < 0.05, η² = 0.254).
Still to come
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 28 participants from a single site; the authors note the small sample limits generalisability and raises the risk of missing a real difference (Type II error), especially for the proprioception outcome where no between-group difference was found. Effects were measured a single time, 15 minutes after taping. Whether the benefit persists through a full training session, a match, or repeated days of taping is unknown. Participants were recreational athletes with chronic ankle instability; the authors state the results may not apply to other populations (elite athletes, older adults, post-surgical patients). No sham or no-tape control group was included, so it is impossible to separate the effect of taping per se from the effect of the specific tape type. Participants knew which tape they received (no blinding of the person being taped), which could influence performance on the hop test. The study did not assess injury incidence or any sport-specific functional task (cutting, shuttle runs), so the link to real-world performance or sprain prevention is untested.
Declared interests
The authors report no conflicts of interest and state the study received no external funding.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the dynamic-balance improvement as evidence that dynamic taping prevents ankle sprains or is superior to sports taping in all respects. The proprioception outcome showed no between-group difference, the effect was measured only 15 minutes after application in 28 recreational athletes, and no injury-prevention or long-term outcome was assessed. The one significant finding is a short-term, task-specific balance advantage in a small group, not a general superiority claim.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →