4.2 Article

Investigation of the effect of kinesiotaping on the respiratory function and depression in male patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a prospective, randomized, controlled, and single-blind study

期刊

AGING MALE
卷 23, 期 5, 页码 648-654

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13685538.2019.1567703

关键词

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; kinesiotaping; pulmonary rehabilitation; respiratory function; depression

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives We aimed to investigate the effect of kinesiotaping (KT) on the respiratory parameters as measured by spirometry and depression in the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Methods In this prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind study 42 male patients with COPD diagnosis were randomized into two groups. In Group1 (n = 21) routine COPD medical treatment plus kinesiotaping and in Group2 (n = 21) only routine COPD medical treatment was given. KT was changed on every fifth day (for a total of three times and 15 days). The patients were assessed using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for difficulty experienced by the patients during respiration, respiratory function test (RFT), modified medical research council (mMRC) dyspnea scale and beck depression inventory (BDI). The data were obtained before treatment and posttreatment. Results In Group 1; statistically significant improvement was found in all parameters except for FVC and FVC % following treatment compared to pretreatment values. Comparison of the difference scores (the amount of recovery between posttreatment and pretreatment) of the two groups showed significantly superior improvement in Group1 for all parameters except for FVC, FVC % and FEV1% following the treatment (p < .05). Conclusions The results of this study showed that supplementary kinesiotaping improved respiratory function and depression significantly compared to only routine medical treatment in COPD patients who were in stable condition.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据