Gatt, M., Willis, S., & Leuschner, S. (2016). A meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of kinesiology taping in the management of cancer-related lymphoedema. European Journal of Cancer Care. Advance online publication. 

DOI Link

Purpose

STUDY PURPOSE: To determine the effectiveness and safety of kinesiology taping (KT) compared to compression bandaging

TYPE OF STUDY: Meta-analysis and systematic review

Search Strategy

DATABASES USED: CINAHL, Cochrane Collaboration, PubMed, Web of Science, PEDro, and multiple sources for ongoing trials and conference proceedings.
 
INCLUSION CRITERIA: Cancer-related lymphedema; evaluation of KT with or without combined decongestive therapy (CDT); comparison to compression bandages or hosiery; randomized, controlled trials (RCT)
 
EXCLUSION CRITERIA: Primary lymphedema or secondary to conditions other than cancer; nonrandomized, controlled trials

Literature Evaluated

TOTAL REFERENCES RETRIEVED: 251
 
EVALUATION METHOD AND COMMENTS ON LITERATURE USED: Risk of bias from Cochrane Collaboration tool. Four studies had high risk of bias.

Sample Characteristics

  • FINAL NUMBER STUDIES INCLUDED = 6 studies, 5 in meta-analysis 
  • TOTAL PATIENTS INCLUDED IN REVIEW = 203
  • SAMPLE RANGE ACROSS STUDIES: 190–70
  • KEY SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS: All had breast cancer–related lymphedema.

Phase of Care and Clinical Applications

PHASE OF CARE: Late effects and survivorship

Results

No statistically significant difference existed between KT and compression bandaging, although the analysis showed overall results in favor of compression bandaging with or without CDT. In five of the six studies, 10%–21% dropped out because of skin-related adverse events. Skin adverse events were reported only in KT groups. The findings regarding patient discomfort or satisfaction with the intervention were mixed. Reported limb reduction volumes varied widely. Four or five studies in the meta-analysis showed greater limb reduction volume in the compression bandaging group.

Conclusions

KT produced lower limb reduction volume and was associated with more skin adverse effects. No difference existed in patient comfort with KT versus compression bandages.

Limitations

  • Mostly low quality/high risk of bias studies
  • High heterogeneity
  • Low sample sizes

Nursing Implications

The findings of this analysis did not provide strong support for the use of KT because no better volume reduction existed and it was associated with more skin problems. If used in clinical practice, KT should be used with caution in patients where bandaging cannot be used. No evidence exists regarding KT use other than for upper extremity lymphedema in this review.

Legacy ID

6130