Transcript Is Strapping/Kinesiological Taping for the Painful Hemiplegic

Is Strapping/Kinesiological
Taping for the Painful
Hemiplegic Shoulder an
Effective Intervention?
Julianne Genochio
April Lovelace
Tim Tollefson
Christian Butler
Ben Flores
Chris McSharry
Learning Objectives
At the conclusion of this presentation the listener will be able to:
• List the common causes of hemiplegic shoulder pain
• List the most common approaches to treatment of hemiplegic
shoulder pain
• Discuss the purported benefits of the use of straps/tape in
treatment and prevention of hemiplegic shoulder pain
• Discuss two ways in which tape is applied to the hemiplegic
shoulder
• Discuss research findings regarding the effectiveness of
straps/tape in treatment of glenohumeral joint subluxation
• Discuss research findings regarding the effects of straps/tape on
ROM, function, and arm muscle tone
• Discuss what research has shown regarding the effects of
straps/tape on the changes of hemiplegic shoulder pain poststroke
Hemiplegic Shoulder Characteristics
• Definition of hemiplegia: severe or complete loss of motor
function
• Onset of hemiplegia can adversely affect the normal
mechanics of the shoulder complex through various
mechanisms
– loss of motor control, secondary changes to surrounding soft tissue,
and glenohumeral joint subluxation
– changes compromise the stability of the shoulder complex and
place individual joints at risk
• Abnormal tone patterns
– Patients initially present with flaccidity.
– Several days to weeks post-stroke muscle tone can progress to
spasticity
Bender et al., 2001
Glenohumeral Subluxation
• Occurs in 17-66% of patients with post-stroke hemiplegia
• In most cases, involves inferior displacement of the
humeral head relative to the glenoid fossa
• GH subluxation often develops when UE is flaccid
– Stability of the GH joint relies on muscular, capsular and
ligamentous integrity
– GH joint no longer receiving muscular support when UE is flaccid
– Exacerbated by improper handling
– Identified with a positive sulcus sign
• Scapular instability can also contribute to GH
subluxation
– Paralysis in stabilizing muscles can lead to a
protracted and depressed scapula
– Postural asymmetry can also lead to protracted
and depressed scapula
– Humeral head more likely to sublux
Fotiadis et al., 2005; Paci et al., 2005; Paci et al., 2007
Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain
• Incidence: occurs in up to 84% of stroke patients with
hemiplegic UE (Griffin et al, 2007)
• Etiology: causes not clearly identified, but thought to have
multiple contributing factors including:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Subluxation
Spasticity
Loss of ROM (especially  external rotation)
Muscle imbalance, joint and soft tissue overstretch
Rotator cuff tears
Soft tissue trauma—damage to capsule, ligaments, tendons
Glenohumeral adhesive capsulitis
Shoulder hand syndrome
• Poor positioning/improper handling techniques!!
Bender & McKenna, 2001; Teasell et al., 2009; Snels et al., 2000
Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain
Onset
• Time frame is extensive and not uniform
Experience of pain can:
• Limit the ability of the patient to reach their maximum
functional capacity
• Lead to minimal participtation in rehabilitative process
due to pain
Fotiadis, 2005; Teasell et al., 2009
Treatment for Hemiplegic
Shoulder Pain
• Common approaches according to survey given to
various HCPs:
– Prevention/education: proper handling and positioning of UE
immediately post-stroke
– Physical Therapy: ROM and functional training
– Local injection of corticosteroids and/or anesthetics
– Oral medications
– Sling/orthoses/taping
• only about 4% of HCPs chose this as a primary approach!
• More commonly utilized as a supplement
• FES and TENS are other approaches utilized in the
treatment of hemiplegic shoulder pain
Hanger et al., 2000; Snels et al., 2000
Use of External Support Devices
Common sources of external support include:
• Slings
• Arm troughs
• Kinesiological tape
Purported benefits
• Prevent glenohumeral subluxation
• Prevent trauma to shoulder joint
structures and tissue
• Decrease/prevent pain
• Maintain and/or assist in improving ROM
• Assist in improving function
Griffin & Bernhardt, 2005; Hanger et al., 2000
Taping and Pain
Purpose of taping
• to facilitate or inhibit the musculature and promote normal alignment
of the scapula in relation to the thorax, humerus and clavicle
Suggested mechanisms of pain reduction
• Proprioceptor feedback serves as a reminder to both patient and
HCPs to handle UE properly
• Maintain ROM
– Prevent assumption of internally rotated shoulder as seen in spastic
UEs
• Sensory stimulation
• Reduce GH subluxation
– Prevent rotator cuff injury
– Reduce soft tissue overstretch
Ancliffe, 1992; Hanger et al., 2000; Bender et al., 2001
Taping the Painful Hemiplegic
Shoulder
1)_As described by Ancliffe (1992)
•
Utilizes 5cm wide tape
•
1st strip of tape applied to shoulder ½ way along length of clavicle
- continued across deltoid in diagonal
direction, wraps around upper arm
- terminates ¼ of the way along
spine of scapula
•
2nd strip applied in same direction
but 2 cm below.
- an anchor tape secured the two ends and
Taping the painful Hemiplegic
Shoulder
2) As described by Hanger (2000)
• 3 lengths of nonstretch tape (Elastoplast Sports tape) applied over an under
tape to prevent skin reaction.
• Arm supported by elbow by second person
• 2 supporting tapes were applied.
– 5cm above elbow, both anterior/posterior,
– moving up the arm and crossing at the
apex of the shoulder.
• 1 tape applied from the medial third of the
clavicle, around the surgival neck of humerus
and along the spine of the scapula to its
medial thrid.
 Difficult to apply and uses large amounts of
tape, leading to increased risk of skin irritation.
Taping the Hemiplegic Shoulder
3)_As described by Morin and Bravo
 Difficult to apply and uses large amounts of tape, leading to increased risk
of skin irritation
Taping the Painful Hemiplegic
Shoulder
As described by Griffin & Bernhardt (2006)
• Therapeutic strapping (n=10):
- Same technique as used by Ancliffe. (using light wt Fixamull tape)
- Anchor tape secured the two ends and on it was written
‘do not wet, do not remove’
- Strapping reapplied every 3-4 days.
•
Placebo strapping (n=10):
- Consisted of anchor tape in isolation.
- Strapping reapplied when needed.
•
Control group (n=12): Received normal
standard care
•
Strapping (therapeutic and placebo)
continued for a four-week period.
Studied Effects
•
•
•
•
Shoulder Pain (RAI)
Range of Motion (SSAF)
Arm Muscle Tone (Modified Ashworth)
Function (MAS, upper arm component)
Shoulder Pain
•
Measured with Ritchie Articular Index (# of pain-free days)
-Pain was considered developed when the RAI elicited a response of
2 or 3 on one or more days.
•
Therapeutic strapping group:
- Mean of 26.2 (+/- 3.9) pain-free days.
•
Placebo strapping group:
- Mean of 19.1 (+/- 10.8) pain-free days.
•
Control group:
- Mean of 15.9 (+/- 11.6) pain-free days.
 Both therapeutic and placebo strapping had significant difference when
compared to no strapping, but no significant difference between either
strapping technique.
Griffin & Bernhardt, 2006
ROM
• Measured passive flexion, abduction, and external rotation.
• Neither the therapeutic strapping nor the control group showed marked
changes in range of motion over 4 weeks.
• Placebo strapping group lost ROM in each direction.
– Wasn’t considered to be a significant amount
 Despite potential for strapping to inhibit movement, no indication that
either therapeutic or placebo strapping resulted in significant reduction in
ROM.
Griffin & Bernhardt, 2006
Arm Muscle Tone
Measured with the Modified Ashworth Scale
• No significant differences in tone
• Placebo group had some reduction in tone
(not significant)
Griffin & Bernhardt, 2006
Function
•
Measured with Motor Assessment Scale
•
Some patients experienced improvements in shoulder function.
-1 in therapeutic group achieved a MAS score of 4
-2 in the placebo group achieved MAS scores of 5
-2 in control group achieved MAS scores of 3
•
However, median of all groups stayed low
- Therapeutic = 1
- Placebo = 1
- Control = 0
 Strapping had no effect on function
Griffin and Bernhardt, 2006
Subluxation
• No studies have evaluated strapping effects
• Other devices evaluated using radiographs
– Conventional triangular sling, Hook-Hemi Harness, Plexiglass lap tray, Bobath
shoulder roll, Arm Trough, GivMohr sling
• Average vertical subluxation pre: 12 mm
• Slings with elbow extension = 4mm reduction
• Slings with elbow flexion = 10mm reduction
• Devices with elbow flexion = 13mm reduction
• Wheelchair attachments = 15mm reduction
Moodie et al., 1986; Williams et al., 1988; Brooke et al., 1991; Zorowitz et al., 1995
Subluxation
•
•
•
Firmer device = greater initial reduction
- Strapping/taping is least firm device
Elbow flexion = greater initial reduction
- Strapping/taping has elbow extended
Therefore strapping/taping likely has minimal reduction
Current Data on subluxation
A systematic review of randomized controlled trials was published 2010 by
Koog, Jin, Yoon, and Min looking at interventions for hemiplegic shoulder
pain.
-Looked at 518 articles (Medline, Embase, Cinahl, and Cochrane registered
trials)
-Considered 36 studies to be potentially eligible
-Excluded 28 based on; duplication of one study, inappropriate
studies, preventive treatments, and indirect pain measures.
 Found lack of correlation between HSP and subluxation.
 Treating any single cause of HSP may not be an optimal method.
 Further research needs to be done to determine if treating multiple
causes involved in HSP will achieve pain reduction, or if HSP
improvement and treating its cause are separate.
Koog, Jin, Yoon, Min, 2010
Current Recommendations in
Rehab
Ottawa Methods Group
- Using Cochrane Collaboration methods they identified and
synthesized evidence from comparative controlled trials.
-Formed an expert panel, which set criteria for grading stregth of the
evidence and provided recommendations.
They developed 147 positive recommendations of clinical benefit concerning
the use of different types of physical rehabilitation interventions involved in
post-stroke rehabilitiation.
In regards to shoulder subluxation
-FES versus control – level I (RCT) and level II (CCT): Grade A
-Bobath support versus control- level II (CCT) Grade B
-Henderson support versus control- level II (CCT) Grade B
-Strapping vs no straping- level 1 (RCT) Grade C+
Ottawa Panel, 2006
Taping the Painful Hemiplegic
Shoulder
As described by Hanger et al (2000)
• Utilizes 4 lengths of nonstretch
Elastoplast Sports tape
• Two main supporting tape strips
begin 5 cm proximal to elbow on
anterior and posterior aspects of
arm and extend vertically
– Anterior tape comes across
top of shoulder and terminates
on spine of scapula
– Posterior tape comes across
top of shoulder and terminates
on clavicle
Both lengths of tape ‘anchored’ at
proximal and distal ends with horizontal
lengths of tape
Hanger et al
• Randomized Control Trial comparing shoulder
strapping with no strapping of the hemiplegic
shoulder
• Objective was to determine whether strapping
the shoulder would reduce pain, preserve ROM,
and improve function
• Both groups received standard physical therapy
rehabilitation
• The treatment group was strapped for 6 weeks,
the control group did not receive strapping
Shoulder Pain
• Visual Analog Scale (VAS)
• 98 pts: 49 in strapping group, 49 in control group
• Taping removed & reapplied by the same
therapist every 2-3 days to minimize stretching
• Both groups were allowed to use other methods
of intervention, including slings
• Measurements were taken initially (day 1), at 6
weeks (the end of treatment) and again at week
14
Hanger et al
Shoulder Pain
• Results:
– Strapping the shoulder did not prevent shoulder pain,
nor maintain ROM
– It was found in this study that pain free ROM was lost
early after stroke and that early intervention is
important
– The authors concluded that there was no evidence
that the strapping works in reducing pain.
– By using an explanatory analysis, it was found that
the strapped group did have less pain at the end of
the treatment phase, but that the results were not
statistically significant
Hanger et al
PT Implication on taping for ROM
and Spasticity
Conclusion:
• Taping has no effect on ROM
• More important is timely intervention
– “The sooner the better” meaning the earlier
the patient is given treatment post-stroke, the
better the outcome
Hanger et al, 2000
PT Implication on Taping for Function
Conclusion:
• Taping has not been shown to cause a
significant improvement in function
– However, taping may provide sensory
feedback
– therefore taping may provide opportunity to
apply augmented knowledge of results
Hanger et al
PT Implication on Taping for Pain
• Taping may delay onset of pain
– The longer patients go without pain, the greater window of
opportunity PTs have to work on function
• Taping the hemiplegic shoulder to decrease pain is of minimal cost
and is non-invasive
– Want to decrease hemiplegic shoulder pain in any way possible,
as it is associated with a poor functional outcome
• Mechanism for delayed pain onset unknown
• Contributing factors to delayed pain onset could include:
– Extra sensory feedback
– Reminder to the patient to maintain proper positioning
– Encourages proper handling techniques by HCPs
• Evidence suggests proper handling techniques can decrease
incidence of hemiplegic shoulder pain
– Placebo effect
Fotiadis et al., 2005
PT Implication for Taping Technique
There is no evidence to suggest that any single
method of taping is superior to the others in
reduction of pain
Choice of taping technique should be based upon:
• Ease of application
• Avoidance of applying to uncomfortable areas
• Use of stretch tape like elastic kinesiotape
Take Home Message
Conclusion:
• Taping Does Not significantly reduce subluxation
or pain
– Tape is applied superficially to skin while underlying deep
tissue and structures are still unsupported
– Firmer supports are better in reducing subluxed shoulder
than taping
– There isn’t much research out there, especially new
research, possibly due to knowledge that this method
really doesn’t help
– So “Why are Therapists using it” -Mikey
Review Learning Objectives
At the conclusion of this presentation the listener will be able to:
• List the common causes of hemiplegic shoulder pain
• List the most common approaches to treatment of hemiplegic
shoulder pain
• Discuss the purported benefits of the use of straps/tape in
treatment and prevention of hemiplegic shoulder pain
• Discuss two ways in which tape is applied to the hemiplegic
shoulder
• Discuss research findings regarding the effectiveness of
straps/tape in treatment of glenohumeral joint subluxation
• Discuss research findings regarding the effects of straps/tape on
ROM, function, and arm muscle tone
• Discuss what research has shown regarding the effects of
straps/tape on the changes of hemiplegic shoulder pain poststroke
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Ancliffe, J. (1992) Strapping the Shoulder in Patients Following a Cerebrovascular
Accident (CVA): a Pilot Study. Australian Physiotherapy, 38 (1) 37-40.
Bender, L., McKenna, K. (2001) Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain: Defining the Problem and
its management. Disability and Rehabilitation, 23 (16) 698-705.
Brooke, M.M., de Lateur, B.J., Diana-Rigby, G.C., Questad, K.A. (1991) Shoulder
Subluxation in Hemiplegia: Effects of Three Different Kinds of Supports.
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 72 (8) 582-582.
Fotiadis, F., Grouios, G., Ypsilanti, A., Hatzinikolaou, K. (2005) Hemiplegic Shoulder
Syndrome: Possible Underlying Neurophysiological Mechanisms. Physical
Therapy Reviews, 10 (1) 51-58.
Griffin, A., Bernhardt, J. (2006) Strapping the Hemiplegic Shoulder Prevents
Development of Pain during Rehabilitation: a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Clinical Rehabilitation, 20 (4) 287-295.
Hanger, H.C., Whitewood, P., Brown, G., Ball, M.C., Harper, J., Cox, R., Sainsbury,
R. (2000) A Randomized Controlled Trial of Strapping to Prevent Post-Stroke
Shoulder Pain. Clinical Rehabilitation, 14 (4) 370-380.
Khadilkar, A., K. Phillips, C. Lamothe, J. Sarnecka, S. Milne, and N. Jean. "Ottawa
Panel Evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines for Post-stroke
Rehabilitation." Top Stroke Rehabilitation 13.2 (2006): 1-269. PubMed. Web.
22 Apr. 2010.
<http://thomasland.metapress.com/content/3tkx7xec2dtgxqkh/fulltext>
References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Koog, Y et al. Interventions for Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain: Systematic Review of
Randomised Controlled Trials. 32.4 (2010): 282-91. PubMed. Web. 22 Apr.
2010. <http://informahealthcare.com/doi/pdf/10.3109/09638280903127685>.
Moodie, N.B., Bribin, J., Morgan, AMG. (1986) Subluxation of the Glenohumeral Joint
in Hemiplegia: Evaluation of Supportive Devices. Physiotherapy Canada, 38
151-157.
Paci, M., Nannetti, L., Rinaldi, L.A. (2005) Glenohumeral Subluxation in Hemiplegia:
An Overview. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 42 (4) 557568.
Paci, M., Nannetti, L., Taiti, P., Baccini, M., Pasquini, J., Rinaldi, L. (2007) Shoulder
Subluxation after Stroke: Relationships with Pain and Motor Recovery.
Physiotherapy Research International, 12 (2) 95-104.
Snels, I.A.K, Beckerman, H., Lankhorst, G.J., Bouter, L.M. (2000) Treatment of
Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain in the Netherlands: Results of a National Survey.
Clinical Rehabilitation, 14 (1) 20-27.
Teasell, R., Foley, N., Bhogal, S. (2008). Version 11: Painfulhemiplegic shoulder.
Obtained from the WWW April 25, 2010 at
http://www.ebrsr.com/reviews_details.php
Zorowitz, R.D., Idank, D., Ikai, T., Hughes, M.B., Johnston, M.V. (1995) Shoulder
Subluxation after Stroke: a Comparison of Four Supports. Archives of Physical
Medicine and Rehabilitation, 76 (8) 763-771.