Manual Therapy xxx (2013) 1e5
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
                                                                     Manual Therapy
                                                     journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/math
Original article
Short term effects of kinesiotaping on acromiohumeral distance in
asymptomatic subjects: A randomised controlled trial
A. Luque-Suarez a, *, S. Navarro-Ledesma a, P. Petocz b, M.J. Hancock c, J. Hush c
a
  Physiotherapy Department, University of Malaga, Malaga, Spain
b
  Department of Statistics, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
c
  Department of Health Professions, Faculty of Human Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia
a r t i c l e i n f o                                  a b s t r a c t
Article history:                                       Objectives: The first aim of this study was to investigate whether kinesiotaping (KT) can increase the
Received 30 July 2012                                  acromiohumeral distance (AHD) in asymptomatic subjects in the short term. The second aim was to
Received in revised form                               investigate whether the direction of kinesiotaping application influences AHD.
3 June 2013
                                                       Background: In recent years, the use of KT has become increasingly popular for a range of musculoskeletal
Accepted 7 June 2013
                                                       conditions and for sport injuries. To date, we are unaware of any research investigating the effect of
                                                       kinesiotaping on AHD. Moreover, it is unknown whether the direction of kinesiotaping application for
Keywords:
                                                       the shoulder is important.
Shoulder
Rehabilitation
                                                       Methods: Forty nine participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups: kinesiotaping group 1
Shoulder impingement syndrome                          (KT1), kinesiotaping group 2 (KT2) and sham kinesiotaping (KT3). AHD ultrasound measurements at
                                                       0 and 60 of shoulder elevation were collected at baseline and immediately after kinesiotape
                                                       application.
                                                       Results: The results showed significant improvements in AHD after kinesiotaping, compared with sham
                                                       taping. The mean difference in AHD between KT1 and KT3 groups was 1.28 mm (95% CI: 0.55, 2.03), and
                                                       between KT2 and KT3 was 0.98 mm (95% CI: 0.23, 1.74). Comparison of KT1 and KT2 groups, which was
                                                       performed to identify whether the direction of taping influences the AHD, indicated there were no
                                                       significant differences.
                                                       Conclusion: KT increases AHD in healthy individuals immediately following application, compared with
                                                       sham kinesiotape. No differences were found with respect to the direction in which KT was applied.
                                                                                                                       Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Background                                                                             active rehabilitation for shoulder impingement (Desmeules et al.,
                                                                                          2004) or surgical repair of the rotator cuff (Saupe et al., 2006). In
   Maintenance of the subacromial space in the shoulder girdle is                         asymptomatic individuals, reduced AHD during shoulder abduction
crucial for normal shoulder function. The subacromial space can be                        correlates with scapular dyskinesia (Silva et al., 2010) and may
assessed by measurement of the acromiohumeral distance (AHD),                             therefore be a useful pre-symptomatic indicator of subacromial
which is the distance between the most cranial part of the humeral                        impingement.
head and the acromion. Reduced AHD occurs when the humeral                                    AHD can be measured by radiography or magnetic resonance
head migrates superiorly with inadequate external rotation, and                           imaging (Saupe et al., 2006), although ultrasonography is a less
correlates with shoulder impingement severity (Desmeules et al.,                          expensive tool that has additional benefits (Azzoni et al., 2004;
2004; Mayerhoefer et al., 2009; Matsuki et al., 2012) and rotator                         Desmeules et al., 2004). For example, real-time ultrasonography
cuff disease (Seitz and Michener, 2011). The measure of AHD can                           enables the radiologist to measure AHD in different degrees of
also be used to identify patients who are most likely to benefit from                      shoulder elevation or rotation (Michener et al., 2003). This
                                                                                          approach has been used to detect subacromial space narrowing in
                                                                                          young athletes as an early sign of shoulder impingement (Girometti
                                                                                          et al., 2006).
 * Corresponding author. Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad de Malaga,
                                                                                              In recent years, the use of a therapeutic taping technique known
Paseo de Martiricos s/n 29009 Malaga, Spain. Tel.: þ34 952137068; fax: þ34
952132913.
                                                                                          as kinesiotaping has become increasingly popular for a range of
    E-mail address: aluques@uma.es (A. Luque-Suarez).                                     musculoskeletal conditions and for sport injuries. For those with
1356-689X/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2013.06.002
    Please cite this article in press as: Luque-Suarez A, et al., Short term effects of kinesiotaping on acromiohumeral distance in asymptomatic
    subjects: A randomised controlled trial, Manual Therapy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2013.06.002
2                                                   A. Luque-Suarez et al. / Manual Therapy xxx (2013) 1e5
rotator cuff tendinopathy and shoulder impingement, kinesiotap-                                      Participants screened
ing has been found to improve self-reported outcomes such as pain                                            N=62
and disability (Thelen et al., 2008; Hsu et al., 2009; Kaya et al.,
2011). However, the mechanism of action of kinesiotaping is                                                                    Excluded (n=13):
currently unknown and no studies have used diagnostic imaging to                                                              Refused to participate
obtain quantitative measures of the effect of kinesiotape on the                                                                     (n=11)
AHD. We hypothesize that kinesiotaping increases the AHD.                                                                      Skin injuries (n=2)
    The primary aim of this study was to investigate whether
                                                                                                              Eligible
kinesiotaping can increase the AHD. We chose to examine this                                                   N=49
initially in asymptomatic subjects to investigate the mechanism of
action of kinesiotaping in the absence of pain. A secondary aim was
to investigate whether the technique of kinesiotaping application
                                                                                                         Baseline measurements
influences any effects on the AHD.
                                                                                     Demographic data: age, gender, height and weight
                                                                                     Acromiohumeral distance (AHD) by ultrasonography in 0° and 60°
2. Method
2.1. Design: randomised controlled trial
                                                                                                              Randomization (n=49)
2.1.1. Participants
    We recruited sixty-two participants, who volunteered from the
student body of the Health Sciences School at Malaga University
(Spain), and were screened for inclusion between January and March                       Experimental               Experimental              Sham group
2012. To be included, participants had to meet all of the following                         group1                     group2               Kinesiotaping 3
criteria: (i) no shoulder pain in the previous month, (ii) no previous                  Kinesiotaping 1            Kinesiotaping 2           (KT3) (n=16)
                                                                                         (KT1) (n=17)               (KT2) (n=16)
shoulder surgery, (iii) negative Neer test: pain 3/10 when the upper
limb is elevated in the plane between flexion and abduction with
prevention of scapular rotation (Neer, 1983), (iv) no painful arc with                                      Follow-up (n = 49)
shoulder flexion or abduction (pain 3/10 on a visual analogue                                          Inmediate post-intervention
scale), (v) between 18 and 40 years of age, (vi) AHD 7 mm with arm                     Acromiohumeral distance (AHD) by ultrasonography in 0°/ 60°
at their side and (vii) able to provide informed, written consent.
Exclusion criteria were as follows: (i) presence of a skin injury or
condition on the shoulder that would contraindicate the use of KT, (ii)
refusal to participate once the conditions of the study were known.
Forty-nine participants were enrolled into the study (Fig. 1).                                                                                  Drop out
                                                                                                                                                  N=0
    Informed written and verbal consent were obtained from all
participants before enrolment and baseline demographic and
clinical data were collected. The study was approved by The Med-
ical Research Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Nursing, Physio-                                     Data pooled from each group for analysis
therapy, Podiatry and Occupational Therapy, University of Malaga
and conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
                                                                                                             Fig. 1. Participant flow diagram.
2.2. Procedure
    Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups using a                  facing forward (Fig. 2). The tape was applied from the coracoid
random-number generator and concealed allocation. Group 1 (KT1)                   process anteriorly to the superior scapular angle posteriorly, to
received kinesiotape applied in the traditional manner from ante-                 maintain shoulder external rotation. The tape was stretched to
rior to posterior. Group 2 (KT2) received kinesiotape applied from                100% and immediately applied to the skin. Once applied, the
posterior to anterior and group 3 (KT3) received sham kinesiotape.                adhesion of the tape to the skin was enhanced by rubbing the
All participants received the kinesiotape application the day after               surface of the tape three times in an anterior to posterior direction.
the initial examination by the primary author. Each participant had                  The KT2 group received an identical treatment to the KT1 group,
ultrasound measures of AHD taken before and after the initial                     except that the tape was applied in the opposite direction: from the
kinesiotape application, in 0 and 60 of active shoulder elevation               superior scapular angle to the coracoid process.
in the scapular plane (Fig. 1).                                                      The KT3 group received a sham kinesiotaping technique,
                                                                                  whereby a single strip was applied in the same place as KT1 and
2.3. Taping techniques                                                            KT2, but without tension and with the shoulder in neutral rather
                                                                                  than external rotation (Fig. 2). All tape applications looked similar.
   All taping was applied by the primary author who has 15 years                     In all groups, kinesiotape was removed by the physiotherapist
experience as a musculoskeletal physiotherapist (ALS), to the                     after outcome data were collected.
shoulder of the dominant upper limb of each participant. The skin
was first cleaned with alcohol to aid adherence of the tape. Stan-                 2.4. Ultrasound measurements
dard 5 cm wide blue k-tapeÓ was used for all taping techniques. The
KT1 group received a kinesiotape application. The goal of taping in                  The ultrasound examination of the shoulder was carried out by
this group was to facilitate shoulder external rotation in order to               the second author (SNL). To reduce bias, the assessor was blinded to
increase AHD. A single strip was applied with the subject in erect                group allocation. Each participant was issued an identification
standing, with the shoulder in maximal external rotation, palm                    number, and this was the only information provided to the
    Please cite this article in press as: Luque-Suarez A, et al., Short term effects of kinesiotaping on acromiohumeral distance in asymptomatic
    subjects: A randomised controlled trial, Manual Therapy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2013.06.002
                                                          A. Luque-Suarez et al. / Manual Therapy xxx (2013) 1e5                                                         3
           Fig. 2. KT1 (left), applied with 100% tension in maximal external rotation. KT3 (right) applied with no tension and in neutral rotation (sham taping).
examiner. Outcome data were collected for all participants.                              participants were encouraged to move out of the standardised
The ultrasound examinations were carried out using the                                   position. Participants were then repositioned and the second set of
MyLabÔ25Gold device (Esaote company, Genoa, Italy) with a 5e                             measurements taken. The ultrasound examiner was blind to their
12 MHz linear transducer. AHD was measured at 0 and 60 of                              initial measurements (values were obscured by placing a sticker on
shoulder elevation in the scapular plane, with the participant                           the ultrasound screen).
seated in an upright position (Kalra et al., 2010). To achieve an
upright position, with shoulder retraction and cervical and thoracic                     2.5. Data analysis
extension, subjects were instructed to sit against the back rest of
the chair, sit up straight, pull their shoulders back and look straight                    A power analysis was carried out using DAHD, (change in
ahead. We chose 60 of elevation because the AHD is smallest be-                         AHD ¼ AHD after treatment minus AHD before treatment) as the
tween 60 and 120 (Flatow et al., 1994). A hydrogoniometer placed
on the participant’s arm was used to position the arm at 0 and 60
of scapular plane elevation (Hebert et al., 2000). To assist in posi-
tioning arm elevation in the scapular plane, a room divider was
positioned at an angle of 30 forward from the subject’s frontal
plane, which was marked with tape on the floor (Theodoridis and
Ruston, 2002). The participants were asked to maintain their arm
elevated actively with enough tension to maintain the position of
the hydrogoniometer (Fig. 3). Between measurements, participants
were instructed to bring their arm down to a resting position to
minimise shoulder fatigue (Theodoridis and Ruston, 2002).
    To measure the AHD in 0 and 60 the ultrasound transducer
was positioned along the major axis of the humerus and parallel to
the flat superior aspect of the acromion, so that both the acromion
and humerus could be visualised. The AHD was measured going
straight down (vertically) from the acromion to the humeral head
(Girometti et al., 2006) (Fig. 4). Measurements of the AHD were
made at two locations: (1) at the most anterior part of the acromial
arch and (2) 1 cm behind the first measure. The mean of the two
measures was recorded (Desmeules et al., 2004). Excellent intra-
rater within-day reliability for ultrasonographic measurements of
acromion-greater tuberosity distance in healthy individuals has
been reported previously (ICC 0.97e0.99) (Kumar et al., 2010), (ICC
0.88e0.91) (Kumar et al., 2011).
    We evaluated the intra-rater reliability of the ultrasound mea-
surement of AHD. Three AHD measurements were taken for all
participants by the same examiner, in 0 and 60 of shoulder
elevation, prior to kinesiotape application. A time interval of 2 min
was provided between each measurement. During that period,                                     Fig. 3. Participant’s position for AHD assessment with ultrasonography.
 Please cite this article in press as: Luque-Suarez A, et al., Short term effects of kinesiotaping on acromiohumeral distance in asymptomatic
 subjects: A randomised controlled trial, Manual Therapy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2013.06.002
4                                                            A. Luque-Suarez et al. / Manual Therapy xxx (2013) 1e5
Fig. 4. Ultrasound measurements of the AHD in 0 (left) and 60 (right) of scapular plane elevation. The area of subacromial space is equivalent to the distance between the two
white cross symbols.
primary response variable. A one-way analysis of variance with                                No adverse effects were reported by any of the participants
three groups required samples of size 17 in each group in order to                         during the treatment and follow-up periods.
identify between-group differences equal to 1 standard deviation of                           The intra-rater reliability of the AHD measurements was
within-group values with a power of at least 70%. This approach                            excellent (ICC 0.94 (95% CI: 0.90, 0.96) at 0 , and 0.87 (0.80, 0.92) at
was utilised as there was no prior information on variability of                           60 ). The ANOVA model for DAHD found that groups were signifi-
change values for AHD.                                                                     cantly different (p ¼ 0.001), but angles were not significant
   Analysis of variance models were constructed for DAHD, using                            (p ¼ 0.72), nor were inter-subject differences (p ¼ 0.30). Group-by-
the repeated measures nature of the data, with subject as a random                         angle interaction was not required in the model, and its exclusion
factor (nested within group), and group and angle as fixed factors.                         made no appreciable difference to the results. Each active group
The three groups were compared pairwise with a Bonferroni                                  was significantly different to the control/sham group (KT1
adjustment for multiple comparisons. The data were analysed us-                            p < 0.001, KT 2 p ¼ 0.006) but the two active groups were not
ing SPSS version 20. A p value of <0.05 was considered statistically                       significantly different from each other (p¼0.95, all with Bonferroni
significant.                                                                                adjustment). Table 2 presents the DAHD for the 3 groups and
   Intrarater reliability of measuring AHD by ultrasound was esti-                         Table 3 presents the effect sizes for comparisons between each of
mated by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for                       the 3 groups.
the second author, using a one-way random effect model.
                                                                                           4. Discussion
3. Results                                                                                     This study investigated whether kinesiotaping increases the
                                                                                           AHD in asymptomatic individuals compared with sham taping. The
    Sixty-two participants were screened and 13 were excluded                              results demonstrate that the AHD, measured by ultrasound, can be
because of skin conditions or preference not to participate. This                          significantly increased by kinesiotaping. Our results also suggest
resulted in 49 participants who were enrolled into the study                               that there is no difference in the effect on the AHD if kinesiotape is
(Fig. 1): 17 in KT1 group and 16 participants each in KT2 and KT3                          applied in the anterior to posterior direction or the opposite
groups. Demographic characteristics and baseline ultrasound                                direction.
measures of AHD are shown in Table 1. The mean age of the par-                                 The main strength of our study is methodological rigour. We
ticipants was 23 years, 70 kg weight and 170 cm height, and 47% of                         used a randomised controlled trial design with true randomisation
the participants in the study were female. The mean baseline AHD                           and concealed allocation. We attained a follow-up of 100% of study
was 10.5 mm at 0 and 7.2 mm at 60 . There were no significant                             participants and there was blinding of the assessor and statistician.
differences in the demographic characteristic or AHD between the                           However, there are limitations of the current study that should be
three groups at baseline.                                                                  recognized. First, we only investigated short-term effects of kine-
                                                                                           siotaping so we cannot make inferences about long-term effects.
                                                                                           Second, these results inform us about the effects of kinesiotaping
Table 1                                                                                    on healthy individuals, and so the effects on AHD in people with
Baseline characteristics of subjects.                                                      subacromial impingement are unknown.
                     Experimental       Experimental      Sham group        P                  Our results that kinesiotaping can increase the AHD in asymp-
                     group 1 (KT1)      group 2 (KT2)     (KT3) n ¼ 16      values         tomatic subjects provides a good foundation to further investigate
                     n ¼ 17             n ¼ 16                                             the effects in those at risk of developing subacromial impingement
    Age in years,    24.7 (5.3)         22.9 (4.1)        21.1 (2.6)        0.06           or those with established pain and dysfunction. A further limitation
      mean (SD)                                                                            is that measurements of AHD over 60 of abduction were not
    Females (n) %    (8) 47%            (10) 62%          (6) 37%           0.376
                                                                                           attained because of technical limitations with ultrasonography
    Weight (kg),     68.6 (12.5)        70.2 (11.7)       72.3 (15.5)       0.726
      mean (SD)
                                                                                           (Desmeules et al., 2004).
    Height (cm),     168.5 (8.6)        168.6 (9.7)       169.1 (18.5)      0.191
      mean (SD)                                                                            Table 2
    AHD (mm)         11.2 (3.3)         10.3 (1.8)        10.1 (1.2)        0.298          DAHD (mm) for the 3 intervention groups; CI: confidence interval.
      in 0 ,
                                                                                             Group            Mean               Standard error            95% CI
      mean (SD)
    AHD (mm)         7.3 (1.9)          7.4 (1.5)         7.0 (1.6)         0.781            KT1               1.158a            0.208                     (0.741e1.576)
      in 60 ,                                                                               KT2               0.856a            0.214                     (0.426e1.287)
      mean (SD)                                                                              KT3              0.128a            0.214                     (0.559 to 0.302)
                                                                                             a
AHD: acromiohumeral distance.                                                                    Based on modified population marginal mean.
    Please cite this article in press as: Luque-Suarez A, et al., Short term effects of kinesiotaping on acromiohumeral distance in asymptomatic
    subjects: A randomised controlled trial, Manual Therapy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2013.06.002
                                                            A. Luque-Suarez et al. / Manual Therapy xxx (2013) 1e5                                                             5
Table 3                                                                                   Conflict of interests
DAHD (mm) and effect size for comparisons between 3 intervention groups; CI:
confidence interval.
                                                                                            The authors declare no conflicts of interest and that this study
  Group comparison            Effect size         95% CI                  P value         was not funded by any source.
  KT1 vs KT3                  1.28*               (0.55e2.03)             <0.001
  KT2 vs KT3                  0.98*               (0.23e1.74)              0.006          References
  KT1 vs KT2                  0.30                (0.44 to 1.04)          0.95
*: Indicates a statically significant difference between groups.                           Alexander CM, Stynes S, Thomas A, Lewis J, Harrison PJ. Does tape facilitate or
                                                                                              inhibit the lower fibres of trapezius? Man Ther 2003;8:37e41.
                                                                                          Azzoni R, Cabitza P, Parrini M. Sonographic evaluation of subacromial space. Ul-
                                                                                              trasonics 2004;42:683e7.
    To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to use diag-                        Cools AM, Witvrouw EE, Danneels LA, Cambier DC. Does taping influence electro-
nostic imaging to obtain quantitative measures of the effect of                               myographic muscle activity in the scapular rotators in healthy shoulders? Man
                                                                                              Ther 2002;7:154e62.
kinesiotaping on AHD distance. Our results provide evidence for a                         Desmeules F, Minville L, Riederer B, Cote CH, Fremont P. Acromio-humeral distance
possible mechanism by which kinesiotaping may provide benefits                                 variation measured by ultrasonography and its association with the outcome of
for people with subacromial impingement, as one component of a                                rehabilitation for shoulder impingement syndrome. Clin J Sport Med 2004;14:
                                                                                              197e205.
multimodal treatment programme.
                                                                                          Flatow EL, Soslowsky LJ, Ticker JB, Pawluk RJ, Hepler M, Ark J, et al. Excursion of the
    It is not known whether changes in AHD of the magnitude                                   rotator cuff under the acromion. Patterns of subacromial contact. Am J Sports
attained by kinesiotaping in this study are sufficient to be clinically                        Med 1994;22:779e88.
important. DAHD and effect size between KT1 and KT3 were 1.28                             Girometti R, De Candia A, Sbuelz M, Toso F, Zuiani C, Bazzocchi M. Supraspinatus
                                                                                              tendon US morphology in basketball players: correlation with main pathologic
(0.55, 2.03) and between KT2 and KT3 0.98 (0.23, 1.74). Future                                models of secondary impingement syndrome in young overhead athletes.
research needs to investigate the association between changes in                              Preliminary report. Radiol Med 2006;111:42e52.
AHD and changes in important clinical outcomes.                                           Hebert LJ, Moffet H, McFadyen BJ, St-Vincent G. A method of measuring three-
                                                                                              dimensional scapular attitudes using the optotrak probing system. Clin Bio-
    We are unaware of any other research about whether the di-                                mech (Bristol, Avon) 2000;15:1e8.
rection of kinesiotape application influences outcomes. In the                             Hsu YH, Chen WY, Lin HC, Wang WT, Shih YF. The effects of taping on scapular
present study we did not find any significant differences between                               kinematics and muscle performance in baseball players with shoulder
                                                                                              impingement syndrome. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2009;19:1092e9.
two application techniques, but it is unknown whether this would                          Kalra N, Seitz AL, Boardman 3rd ND, Michener LA. Effect of posture on acromio-
be the case in those with pathology. Based on our findings it does                             humeral distance with arm elevation in subjects with and without rotator cuff
not seem that applying the tape in the direction of the movement                              disease using ultrasonography. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2010;40:633e40.
                                                                                          Kaya E, Zinnuroglu M, Tugcu I. Kinesio taping compared to physical therapy mo-
that is desired is important.                                                                 dalities for the treatment of shoulder impingement syndrome. Clin Rheumatol
    We can only speculate about the physiological mechanisms by                               2011;30:201e7.
which kinesiotaping increased the AHD in this study. One possi-                           Kumar P, Bradley M, Swinkels A. Within-day and day-to-day intrarater reliability of
                                                                                              ultrasonographic measurements of acromion-greater tuberosity distance in
bility is that kinesiotaping caused a change in the firing pattern of
                                                                                              healthy people. Physiother Theory Pract 2010;26:347e51.
the rotator cuff motor units, which could increase humeral head                           Kumar P, Chetwynd J, Evans A, Wardle G, Crick C, Richardson B. Interrater and
external rotation. There is some evidence that kinesiotaping                                  intrarater reliability of ultrasonographic measurements of acromion-greater
applied to the shoulder increases trapezius muscle activity in                                tuberosity distance in healthy people. Physiother Theory Pract 2011;27:172e5.
                                                                                          Matsuki K, Matsuki KO, Yamaguchi S, Ochiai N, Sasho T, Sugaya H, et al. Dynamic
baseball players with shoulder impingement (Hsu et al., 2009).                                in vivo glenohumeral kinematics during scapular plane abduction in healthy
However, in healthy individuals, traditional taping has been shown                            shoulders. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2012;42:96e104.
not to significantly increase muscular activity, measured with                             Mayerhoefer ME, Breitenseher MJ, Wurnig C, Roposch A. Shoulder impingement:
                                                                                              relationship of clinical symptoms and imaging criteria. Clin J Sport Med
electromyography (Cools et al., 2002; Alexander et al., 2003). In                             2009;19:83e9.
future research it will be interesting to use electromyography to                         Neer 2nd CS. Impingement lesions. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;173:70e7.
ascertain whether rotator cuff muscle activity is altered by                              Michener LA, McClure PW, Karduna AR. Anatomical and biomechanical mecha-
                                                                                              nisms of subacromial impingement syndrome. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)
kinesiotaping.                                                                                2003;18:369e79.
                                                                                          Saupe N, Pfirrmann CW, Schmid MR, Jost B, Werner CM, Zanetti M. Association
5. Conclusion                                                                                 between rotator cuff abnormalities and reduced acromiohumeral distance. AJR
                                                                                              Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:376e82.
                                                                                          Seitz AL, Michener LA. Ultrasonographic measures of subacromial space in pa-
    Kinesiotaping increases the AHD in individuals without                                    tients with rotator cuff disease: a systematic review. J Clin Ultrasound
shoulder pain immediately following application of tape,                                      2011;39:146e54.
                                                                                          Silva RT, Hartmann LG, Laurino CF, Biló JP. Clinical and ultrasonographic correlation
compared with sham kinesiotape. No differences were found with
                                                                                              between scapular dyskinesia and subacromial space measurement among ju-
respect to the direction in which the tape was applied. It will be                            nior elite tennis players. Br J Sports Med 2010;44(6):407e10.
useful for future studies to investigate whether kinesiotaping                            Thelen MD, Dauber JA, Stoneman PD. The clinical efficacy of kinesio tape for
improves treatment outcomes in individuals at risk of or with                                 shoulder pain: a randomized, double-blinded, clinical trial. J Orthop Sports Phys
                                                                                              Ther 2008;38:389e95.
subacromial impingement, and whether these changes are clini-                             Theodoridis D, Ruston S. The effect of shoulder movements on thoracic spine 3D
cally meaningful.                                                                             motion. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2002;17:418e21.
 Please cite this article in press as: Luque-Suarez A, et al., Short term effects of kinesiotaping on acromiohumeral distance in asymptomatic
 subjects: A randomised controlled trial, Manual Therapy (2013), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2013.06.002