Efficacy of kinesiotaping during rehabilitation following total knee arthroplasty: a prospective randomised controlled trial.
Ahmed Al-Saadi, Bernd Wegener, Andreas Veihelmann
Adding kinesiotape to standard inpatient rehab after knee replacement reduced postoperative swelling by a clinically meaningful amount (2.1 cm vs 0.9 cm) and modestly improved knee flexion.
Pain and walking speed did not differ between groups.
Key findings
1The primary outcome (change in knee circumference from postoperative day 10 to day 25) showed a significantly greater reduction in the KT group (2.1 cm) than the control group (0.9 cm), a between-group difference of 1.2 cm (95% CI 0.7–1.7; p < 0.001).
2Knee flexion improved more in the KT group (18.3°) than the control group (14.4°), a statistically significant difference (p = 0.03).
3No statistically significant between-group differences were found for pain reduction (p = 0.06), knee extension (p = 0.24), or any of the three functional tests (Timed Up and Go, chair stand, 10-m walk).
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
The same physician applied the kinesiotape and performed all outcome measurements, so neither the patient nor the assessor was blinded; measurement bias is possible despite standardised procedures. The trial was registered retrospectively (after enrolment had begun), which weakens the pre-registration of the protocol. Knee circumference was measured only on the operated limb, with no contralateral comparison, making it hard to separate treatment effect from natural postoperative recovery. No long-term follow-up was performed, so it is unknown whether the swelling or flexion advantage persists beyond day 25. The KT group had a slightly higher proportion of male participants (47.1% vs 37.3%), which the authors note could influence muscle recovery and pain perception. Formal session-by-session adherence data were not recorded, so it is unclear whether both groups attended the same number of therapy sessions. Single-centre design limits generalisability to other rehabilitation settings.
Declared interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The study was funded by the SRH scientific fund. The kinesiotaping protocol followed the official K-Active Europe GmbH (Minden, Germany) certification, which is the manufacturer of the tape used; the authors do not disclose a financial relationship with that company.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the pain result (p = 0.06) as evidence that kinesiotape reduces post-surgical pain. It did not reach the prespecified significance threshold, and the only significant primary finding is the swelling reduction. Also, the same physician who applied the tape measured all outcomes, so the 1.2 cm swelling difference could partly reflect assessor expectation rather than a true tissue effect.
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 →