Mobilization with movement and kinesio taping in knee arthritis—evaluation and outcomes
The aim of this study was to investigate the acute effects of Mulligan mobilization with movement (MwM) and taping on function and pain intensity in patients with osteoarthritis (OA).
Materials and methods
Female patients aged between 40 and 70 years with knee OA participated in the study. The patients were divided into three groups and each group received different interventions. Group 1 received MwM and taping according to Mulligan’s concept. Group 2 received MwM and placebo taping with no recovery effect and group 3 received placebo taping. Functional tests including lifting, picking up, sit and stand-up, socket tests in addition to climbing up and down stairs, ten metres walk, and timed up and go (TUG) tests were performed before and after intervention. Pain during the test performances were assessed by a visual analog scale.
Performance in all tests improved significantly in the MwM + taping group, while only sit and stand-up, ten metres walk, and TUG test performances improved in the MwM + placebo taping group (p < 0.05). Pain intensity during the tests was also significantly better after intervention in those two groups (p < 0.05). Comparison between the groups showed that the pain intensity during all tests was less and functional test scores were better in sit and stand-up, ten metres walk, and walking down stairs in the MwM + taping group than the MwM + placebo taping group.
MwM accompanied by taping improves pain during functional activities as well as the performance. MwM without taping may also improve pain intensity; however, it may be inadequate in increasing the performance.
KeywordsMobilization Knee Osteoarthritis Taping
Compliance with ethical standards
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
- 1.Felson DT, Lawrence RC, Dieppe PA, Hirsch R, Helmick CG, Jordan JM, … & Sowers M (2000) Osteoarthritis: new insights. Part 1: the disease and its risk factors. Ann Intern Med 133(8):635–646Google Scholar
- 3.Mulligan BR (2004) Manual therapy:“nags”, “snags”, “mwms” Etc. Optp. 5th Ed. Wellington: NZGoogle Scholar
- 14.Finan PH, Buenaver LF, Bounds SC, Hussain S, Park RJ, Haque UJ, … & Smith MT (2013) Discordance between pain and radiographic severity in knee osteoarthritis: findings from quantitative sensory testing of central sensitization. Arthritis Rheumatol 65(2):363–372Google Scholar
- 16.Burstein H, Wright A, Timothy M (1993) Biomechanics. In: Insall JN (ed) Surgery of the knee, 2nd edn. Churchill Livingstone, New York, pp 43–54Google Scholar
- 17.Heck DA, Murray DG (1990) Biomechanics of the knee. In: Evarts CM (ed) Surgery of the musculoskeletal system, 2nd edn. Churchill Livingstone, New York, pp 3243–3251Google Scholar
- 18.Clarke ED, Scott WD, Insall JN (2001) Anatomy. In: Insall JN, Scott WD (eds) Surgery of the knee, 3rd edn. Churchill Livingstone, Philadelphia, pp 13–77Google Scholar
- 19.Öztürk L, Aktan ZA, Varol T (1997) Alt Ekstremite Kasları, İşlevsel Anatomi. Saray Kitabevleri, İzmir, pp 192–194Google Scholar
- 24.Kacar C, Gilgil E, Urhan S, Arıkan V, Dündar Ü, Öksüz MC, … & Apaydın A (2005) The prevalence of symptomatic knee and distal interphalangeal joint osteoarthritis in the urban population of Antalya, Turkey. Rheumatol Int 25(3):201–204Google Scholar