Physiotherapy Practice and Research 42 (2021) 69–77 69

DOI:10.3233/PPR-200459
IOS Press

Kinesio tape in paediatric physiotherapy:

A content analysis of practitioner experience
Claire Smarta,∗ , Kylie Murphya , Kristen Andrewsa and Donalee Gregoryb
a School of Community Health, Charles Sturt University, NSW, Australia
b Kurrajong Therapy Plus, Wagga Wagga, NSW, Australia

Received 8 October 2020

Accepted 1 March 2021

Abstract.
INTRODUCTION: Kinesio tape (KT) is an emerging tool in paediatric physiotherapy. A small body of research suggests
KT is efficacious with some children, but clinical guidelines are not yet available. The aim of this study was to gather
physiotherapists’ practices and experiences using KT with children. The focus was on why, where, how, and how long
physiotherapists use KT with children, and the outcomes they observe, to guide future experimental research.
METHOD: Nine Australian physiotherapists, each with at least two years of experience using KT with children, were
recruited. All nine physiotherapists completed a largely open-ended online survey, and three of these physiotherapists
participated in a brief follow-up telephone interview. Basic content analysis was conducted.
RESULTS: The physiotherapists’ practices and experience with KT largely related to four themes: (1) taping for muscle
activation; (2) gait and posture outcomes; (3) child tolerance limiting effectiveness; and (4) inconsistent application methods
and treatment durations.
CONCLUSION: Physiotherapists in this study used KT to serve a variety of purposes, it was mainly considered beneficial
for improving gait and posture. However, there was little agreement regarding how to apply it, for how long, and the exact
nature of its benefits. Empirical research is also lacking on these questions. The effectiveness of KT as an adjunct therapy for
improving children’s posture and gait warrants further investigation. Research comparing specific taping application methods
and durations will be valuable in guiding physiotherapists’ practice.
Keywords: Physiotherapy, kinesio tape, paediatric, evidence-based practice, qualitative

1. Introduction However, the mechanisms underlying these claims

Physiotherapy interventions aim to maximize chil-
dren’s functional abilities and participation [1]. In
addition to traditional interventions, such as strength
training, adjunctive therapies include serial casting,
hydrotherapy, and kinesio taping [2, 3].
Kinesio Tape (KT), also known as elastic thera-
peutic, neuromuscular, kinaesthetic, or kinesiology
tape, is a form of adhesive tape applied to the skin.
The elastic properties allow it to be stretched up to
60% from its original length [4]. It is claimed that
KT increases muscle activity, re-educates the neu-
romuscular system, and enhances performance [5].
∗ Corresponding
author: Claire Smart, School of Community
Health, Charles Sturt University, 386 Elizabeth Mitchell Dr, Thur-
goona NSW 2640, Australia. Tel.: +61 1800 275 278; E-mail:
claire-smart@outlook.com.
are yet to be investigated. The quantity and quality of
evidence concerning KT use with children remains
limited.
Much of the evidence for KT in paediatric physio-
therapy is limited to children with cerebral palsy (CP)
[6]. Güçhan and Mutlu [6] reviewed five studies that
found that KT contributed to improvements in body
structure and function, and activity and participation,
for children with CP. Measured outcomes included
the Gross Motor Function Measure (GMFM), Timed
Up and Go and The Functional Independence Mea-
sure for Children (Wee-FIM). However, four studies
in the same review found no statistically significant
effect of KT. Unger et al. [7] also concluded in their
systematic review that there is moderate evidence for
KT as an adjunct to therapy for children with CP,
in particular for Gross Motor Function Classification

ISSN 2213-0683/$35.00 © 2021 – IOS Press. All rights reserved.

70 C. Smart et al. / Kinesio tape in paediatric physiotherapy
Scale (GMFCS) levels I and II for sitting control as
measured by the GMFM. There is less evidence for
the effectiveness of KT when used for children with
CP classified as GMFCS levels IV and V. Footer [8]
studied a therapeutic tape similar to KT, with chil-
dren with quadriplegic CP GMFCS levels IV and
V. Over 12 weeks, Footer’s study tested for a rela-
tionship between therapeutic taping (bilaterally along
paraspinal and trapezius muscles) and functional sit-
ting control, as measured by the GMFM-88. Footer
concluded that taping is ineffective in children with
exaggerated extensor tone and cognitive impairments
[8]. With children with CP GMFCS levels III, IV
and V, Şimşek et al. [9] found improvements in sit-
ting activity on the Sitting Assessment Scale (SAS)
resulting from KT paraspinal taping, but not GMFM
scores.
There is a small body of research on the use of KT
in non-CP populations, including children with tor-
ticollis [10–12], idiopathic scoliosis [13], dysphagia,
and brachial plexus palsy [14, 15], and with children
in an acute setting [16]. Overall, existing research
on the use of KT with children remains limited and
equivocal, with only a small number of controlled
clinical trials [2]. Moreover, the small sample sizes
and heterogeneous nature of participants in KT stud-
ies, and the lack of standardization and transparency
of KT application techniques and durations, limit the
clinical utility of the evidence currently available [2,
17]. Rigorous experimental studies are required to
analyse possible mechanisms of effectiveness and
identify moderating factors [2, 6].
Notwithstanding the absence of strong empiri-
cal evidence and the lack of evidence-based clinical
guidelines, physiotherapists are using KT with chil-
dren, presumably based on a trial-and-error approach
and some anecdotal success. These physiotherapists
are accumulating clinical experience that has not yet
been captured, but which may help to guide clinically
useful future research in this area. Further research is
needed to establish how KT is effective, with which
children, and under what circumstances. There is also
a need to identify factors that might moderate the
effectiveness of KT, so that such factors can be appro-
priately accounted for in future experimental studies.
There is currently no published research investi-
gating practice-based insights about the use of KT
with children. The aim of the current study was to
gather physiotherapists’ experiences with KT in pae-
diatric practice. The intention was to uncover relevant
issues and promising directions to guide the focus and
design of future research in this area.
The questions guiding this study were:
• Why, where, and how do physiotherapists apply
KT in paediatric practice?
• For how long do physiotherapists apply the tape
in paediatric practice, and why?
• What changes have physiotherapists noted in chil-
dren they have treated with KT?
2. Methods
2.1. Research design
An online cross-sectional survey with largely
open-ended questions was conducted. Brief follow-
up telephone interviews were conducted to clarify
and elaborate on survey responses. This research was
conducted with the approval of Charles Sturt Univer-
sity’s Human Research Ethics Committee (Project #
400/2017/27).
2.2. Sampling and recruitment
Purposive sampling required the recruitment of
physiotherapists who had experience in the specific
field of interest [19]. To be included, participants
were required to be a qualified physiotherapist with
a minimum of two years of experience using KT
with children. A longer minimum period of experi-
ence was considered too restrictive, given that KT is a
relatively new tool in paediatric practice in Australia.
Physiotherapists were invited to participate in this
study by email and/or by an information sheet dis-
tributed via the Australian Physiotherapy Association
paediatric physiotherapy group. The email was also
distributed to the professional networks of physio-
therapy academics at Charles Sturt University and
paediatric physiotherapists known to the researchers.
The emails encouraged recipients to forward the
information on to others who met the inclusion crite-
ria, as a form of snowball sampling [20].
2.3. Data collection
The survey was built with SurveyMonkey® and
included ten questions, including open-ended and
multiple-choice questions (see Table 1).
The survey was piloted with a physiotherapist who
was experienced in paediatric practice, for feedback
regarding the clarity of the questions. This feedback
was used to refine the survey questions to increase
 C. Smart et al. / Kinesio tape in paediatric physiotherapy 71

Research question
For screening and
sample description
purposes only
Why, where and how do
paediatric physiotherapists
apply KT?
How long do paediatric
physiotherapists apply the
tape for, and why?
What changes have paediatric
physiotherapists noted
in children that they
have treated with KT?
Table 1
Research and survey questions
Survey question Response type
• In what area of physiotherapy • Multiple choice:
have you predominantly been ◦ Acute care
using KT with children? ◦ Non-acute care
• How many years of experience • Multiple choice
do you have working with KT ◦ Less than 2 years
in paediatric physiotherapy? (survey terminated here)
◦ 2-3 years
◦ 4-5 years
◦ More than 5 years
• In your experience, for what • Comment box
purpose(s)/problem(s)/outcome(s) is
KT with children most effective?
• In a situation where you think KT • Comment box
with children has been effective,
where on the body and how
did you apply KT and why?
• Are there any times you have found • Comment box
KT to be ineffective in a particular situation
or for a particular outcome? Why do
you think it was ineffective?
• In this box, please share any other • Comment box
thoughts you have about using KT with children
• How long do you use KT in a single application? • Comment box
How long do you leave between taping applications?
Are there any reasons for choosing these time frames?
• How long do you use KT as an intervention? • Comment box
Is there any reason for this time frame?
• What changes have you observed in children who • Comment box
have been treated with KT?
Please be as specific as possible.

the specificity of participants’ answers. The survey
did not require all questions to be answered as there
was the potential for answers to relate to more than
one question and repetition of information was not
desired. It was optional for the participants to pro-
vide their contact details for a follow-up interview.
The follow-up interviews were conducted by the
lead researcher using a semi-structured interview
guide based on the respondent’s survey responses;
for example, seeking more detail about the therapist’s
KT training, methods of parent education, or changes
in practice with KT experience [21].
2.4. Data analysis
As the survey data was submitted and the telephone
interview data was transcribed, it was transferred to
an Excel spread sheet. Basic content analysis was
then undertaken by one coder, with regular consen-
sus discussions with the other researchers. While care
was taken to respect the non-hermeneutic nature of
basic content analysis [18], categories were gener-
ated inductively to fit the points (or codes) expressed
by the participants. Constant comparisons between
new codes and the developing categories were made;
and where needed, new categories were created to
accommodate the data [21, 22]. Due to the anony-
mous nature of the survey and the nature of basic
content analysis, member checking was not under-
taken.
A preliminary set of categories was generated by
sorting the data into as many categories as possible
and labelling these descriptively [22]. The data was
read through several times to ensure all survey-item
responses were allocated to at least one category.
After the preliminary category list was generated,
the categories were subsumed under themes and,
where applicable, subthemes were created to assimi-
late closely related categories [23].
3. Results
A total of nine participants responded to the online
survey, all of whom met the inclusion criteria. As
shown in Table 2, seven participants reported having
72 C. Smart et al. / Kinesio tape in paediatric physiotherapy

Table 2 Table 3
Characteristics of participants Summary of the content analysis findings
Number of Number of
participants participants
Current area of employment Why apply KT?
Non-acute care 9 Muscle activation 8
Acute care 0 Muscle relaxation 4
Years of experience with KT Proprioception 4
Two to three 7 Increased weight shift 3
Four to five 2 Improved endurance 2
More than five 0 Who with?
Source of KT training/knowledge Children with cerebral palsy 5
KT course by Milestones Therapy 1 GMFCS levels I, II and III
Previously used rigid tape 1 Hypermobility Syndrome 4
Previously used KT in sport 1 Scoliosis 1
Tutorial book 1 Motor Developmental Delay 1
Independent research 1 Patella Femoral Joint Pain Syndrome 1
University course material 1 Where and how?
‘I’ strip on various sites 4
‘Y’ strip on various sites 1
2-3 years of experience using KT in paediatric prac- Two ‘I’ strips to create an ‘X’ 1
tice, and two participants reported having 4-5 years of shape over abdominals
experience. Five participants agreed to be contacted Paper-off technique 3
Through fingers or toes 2
for a follow-up telephone interview; however, only
Sports taping 2
three participants responded to subsequent contact Factors limiting use or effectiveness
and consented to being interviewed. Each inter- Lack of tolerance 7
view lasted between three and a half minutes and Skin sensitivity or integrity 3
Comorbid conditions 3
eight minutes. All participants were physiotherapists High spasticity 1
practicing within Australia, with experience only in Tactile defensiveness 1
non-acute care. In this section, the findings are orga- Duration of single application of KT
nized under the three broad research questions. The ‘Two to three days on’ 5
‘Five days on’ 4
findings are summarized in Table 3. Activity specific 2
Duration of overall KT treatment
3.1. Why, where and how do paediatric Varied within and between all practitioners 9
physiotherapists apply KT? Reason for KT duration decisions
Until goal met (e.g., reasonable improvement, 4
no further improvement, see carry-over effect)
3.1.1. Why do paediatric physiotherapists apply Consultation with parents 2
KT? As advised in a course or by a colleague 2
KT was used for a variety of treatment aims. These Sweat caused removal 2
Observed improvements
were not mutually exclusive, with two or more aims Improved posture 5
often overlapping. A common aim was muscle acti- Reduced toe walking 3
vation: activation of weak or underactive muscles Child or parent perceived improvement 7
was reported by eight of the nine participants. Four Improved endurance 2
Improvement in upper limb function 2
participants reported using KT to activate the trans- Improved task-specific function 2
verse abdominal muscle, three mentioned the dorsi
flexor (tibialis anterior) muscle, two mentioned trunk weight shift, two participants reported taping to
extensors, one mentioned the trapezius muscle, and improve endurance for children with pain and fatigue
one mentioned taping the phalangeal extensors, wrist related to hypermobility, and one reported aiming to
extensors, and supinator muscles. However, four par- increase stability of the jaw to assist chewing.
ticipants reported using KT for muscle relaxation: to
reduce hypertonia, myofascial tension, or lower back 3.2. Who do physiotherapists use KT with?
spasms.
Four participants also reported using KT to in- Five participants reported using KT with children
crease proprioception to reduce toe walking or imp- with cerebral palsy GMFCS levels I, II and III. Two
rove sitting and dynamic postures in children with reported using KT with children with hemiplegia.
CP. Three participants reported using KT to increase One participant each reported using KT with children
 C. Smart et al. / Kinesio tape in paediatric physiotherapy
with diplegic, ataxic, and dystonic CP. In addition,
four participants reported using KT with children
with hypermobility syndrome. One participant used
KT with children with structural and postural scol-
iosis and gross motor developmental delay, and one
other reported using KT with children with patella
femoral joint pain syndrome.
3.3. Where and how do paediatric
physiotherapists apply KT?
Four participants reported using an ‘I’ strip tap-
ing technique. Two participants used this to activate
the transverse abdominals and bilateral obliques. One
reported using an ‘I’ strip across the heel from medial
to lateral malleoli. One reported using a ‘Y’ strip
in a variety of ways including: to inhibit the plan-
tar flexor muscles, on the temporomandibular joint,
and to activate the pectoralis major muscle. One par-
ticipant reported combining two ‘I’ strips to create
an ‘X’ shape with the abdominals in shortened posi-
tion. Three participants used a paper-off technique
when applying KT. When using this technique, one
participant stated that they applied KT from origin to
insertion.
Two participants reported using KT through toes or
fingers. Both reported using this technique for assist-
ing dorsi-flexion. One used an ‘I’ strip with diamonds
cut to separate toes. The other participant reported
applying KT through the fingers for wrist extension.
Two participants used a sports taping technique, one
of whom stated this was for the prevention of inver-
sion ankle sprains.
3.4. Factors limiting effectiveness
Seven out of the nine participants reported that
the child or family did not always tolerate KT. Two
of these participants reported that a child’s discom-
fort during removal of the tape caused them to
fear reapplication. Three participants reported that
skin sensitivity or integrity (e.g., eczema) reduced
application duration and consequently the tape’s
effectiveness.
Three participants reported that they experienced
cases in which taping did not produce the expected
results due to comorbid limitations, particularly beh-
avioural and cognitive processing challenges. One
noted that KT was also inappropriate in a child with
a high degree of spasticity. For another participant,
tactile defensiveness was a condition for which KT
was considered inappropriate.
73
3.5. Involving parents in KT treatment
The three participants who participated in a phone
interview reported educating parents as part of their
KT treatment. One participant reported coaching par-
ents about the expectation of KT and said some
families became confident in taping application.
However, another participant reported that some par-
ents prefer to leave the responsibility of taping to the
physiotherapist. Two of the three participants said
that some parents video-record the KT demonstra-
tion. One of these participants also reported providing
instructional handouts to parents.
3.6. Use of KT as an adjunct therapy
All of the participants reported using KT only
as an adjunct to conventional therapy. One partici-
pant emphasized pairing KT with functional training
to maximise results. Three participants reported
instructing the parents to increase their home exer-
cises (e.g., encouraging parents to increase intensity
of gait training when taping to increase ankle dorsi-
flexion).
3.7. For how long do paediatric physiotherapists
apply the tape, and why?
3.7.1. Duration of single application of KT
There was no consensus among the participants
regarding the duration of a single application. Indeed,
for any single participant, there was no one standard
duration. Five out of the nine participants reported
using KT for ‘two to three days on’ per week. The
other four participants reported using KT for ‘five
days on’. Two participants also noted that they use KT
as required, depending on the specific purpose (e.g.,
using facial tape during mealtimes only, or using KT
during game time to enhance performance).
3.8. Duration of overall KT treatment
Reported treatment durations varied between the
participants. In one participant’s experience, the nor-
mal duration was two to three applications. Another
participant reported taping for two to five sessions.
Another reported an initial trial time of three weeks,
increasing to six weeks for some older children.
Another participant reported using KT for no longer
than six weeks because of skin tolerance concerns.
74 C. Smart et al. / Kinesio tape in paediatric physiotherapy
3.9. Reason for KT duration decisions
Six participants reported that decisions regarding
treatment duration were largely influenced by the
child’s tolerance of the tape. Four reported that they
continue taping as long as required to achieve the
goal. One reported using KT as long as needed until
there is ‘reasonable improvement’. Another reported
that they use KT as long as they see ‘follow over
results’ or a ‘carry over effect’.
Consultation with the parents was reported by two
participants as an important factor in determining
KT treatment duration. Two considerations were the
child’s or family’s tolerance of the tape and the par-
ent’s ability to safely remove the tape.
Two participants chose timeframes because they
were recommended by a paediatric taping course or
a colleague. KT coming off due to sweat was noted
by another two participants, either during a treatment
session or during the following days. One participant
reported that the duration was influenced by the avail-
ability of the next appointment, usually a week after
tape application.
3.10. What changes do physiotherapists note in
children they have treated with KT?
Seven participants reported an improvement in gait
as an outcome of using KT. Two of these participants
reported an improvement in functional joint range
which resulted in gait improvements. Five reported an
improvement in posture. For example, one participant
reported an improved posture measured by postu-
ral photo assessment and sacral angle measurement.
Three participants noted a decrease in toe walking,
based on pre- and post-gait observation.
Two participants reported improvement in endu-
rance, which increased activity participation time.
Two participants reported an improvement in upper
limb function. For example, one reported an improve-
ment in functional hand use with the wrist in
an extended position. Two participants reported an
improvement in the quality of a functional task: stair
climbing, table-top tasks, or handwriting. One par-
ticipant also reported an improvement in balance
strategies.
One participant reported improvement in a child’s
ability to chew, based on time to complete a meal and
amount of intake. One participant reported a decrease
in exertional dystonia during standing and walking.
One participant noted improvement in a child’s sports
performance.
Seven participants reported child or parent perce-
ived improvements. Three reported a decrease in pain
as reported by the child or parent. Two reported that
KT improved children’s splint- and shoe-wearing
time, as reported by parents. Three participants
reported a parent perceived reduction in falls at home
after KT intervention.
4. Discussion
The aim of this study was to explore physiother-
apists’ experiences with the use of KT in children:
why, where, how, and how they apply KT; how long
they apply it for; and what changes they have
noted. A range of clinical experiences were captured
that signal important considerations and worthwhile
directions for future research. Muscle activation was
the most commonly reported treatment aim, followed
by muscle relaxation and proprioception. Cerebral
palsy was the most frequently reported diagnostic
group. Reported sites and techniques of KT appli-
cation varied. Durations of single KT applications
and overall KT treatment durations also varied. The
participants considered a range of contextual fac-
tors when deciding whether and for how long to use
KT. These factors included child factors (e.g., child
tolerance, skin sensitivity, sweating), parent factors
(e.g., the parent’s willingness and ability to apply and
remove KT), and evidence of benefit. The participants
noted a wide range of positive outcomes in children
they have treated with KT, most commonly improve-
ments in gait and posture. Other less frequently rep-
orted outcomes included improved chewing.
The use of KT by almost all the participants for
muscle activation is consistent with KT use in exist-
ing research [9, 24]. However, given the beliefs/aims
of some of the participants regarding the use of KT
for muscle relaxation, research ruling out or confirm-
ing the ability of KT to induce muscle relaxation
would be helpful. The current study shows that some
physiotherapists are using KT for transverse abdo-
minis activation; however, there is no published rese-
arch investigating KT for muscle activation of the
transverse abdominis muscle in children. Since impr-
ovements have been reported in the research literature
with other postural muscles, research on the effect of
KT use with this specific muscle is warranted.
The participants’ exclusive use of KT with children
with CP GMFCS level I, II and III is also consistent
with past research findings [7, 9, 25]. Footer [8] found
that use of KT with children with CP GMFCS level
 C. Smart et al. / Kinesio tape in paediatric physiotherapy
IV or V was not effective. Children with CP GMFCS
level IV and V often have comorbid conditions [26]
which, as suggested by participants in this study, may
compromise the effectiveness of KT. In the current
study, participants believed factors such as spasticity
compromise KT effectiveness.
The participants’ taping techniques were inconsis-
tent. This may partly be because the tape is applied
with varying aims. For example, taping was reported
for both activating and relaxing muscles. However,
the fact that past research has not compared the
effectiveness of different application methods for any
particular aim is a limitation in the existing evidence
base. Indeed, the general lack of transparency in
application methods in the existing literature limits
repeatability and clinical utility [2, 27]. In the absence
of evidence comparing different techniques, clini-
cians are required to analyse the functional deficit and
apply the tape using their clinical reasoning [6]. The
current study highlights the potential helpfulness of
future research directly comparing taping techniques
for a particular purpose.
The durations of KT use also varied. Research
investigating the most effective KT application dura-
tions for particular purposes is limited. In general
(beyond KT use), there is a lack of published research
investigating minimal timeframes for eliciting clini-
cally significant improvements. However, one study
by Christiansen and Lange [28] found that continu-
ous conventional physiotherapy showed no additional
benefit when compared to four-week interventions
with six-week pauses [28]. More research focused
on questions of duration in relation to specific pur-
poses (e.g., muscle activation) is needed to guide
physiotherapists.
The participants in this study reported issues con-
cerning child and family tolerance, particularly skin
sensitivity. This point has attracted surprisingly lit-
tle attention in the existing research literature. Safety
of KT application has been discussed in relation to
cancer lymphoedema treatment [29]. However, such
research is not directly transferrable to paediatric
practice. In the existing paediatric KT research lit-
erature, Giray et al. [12] used a 24-hour period to test
for allergic reaction. Şimşek et al. ‘followed’ (with
unclear meaning) children for three days to monitor
for skin irritation. Footer [8] completed an eight-
day skin check to rule out any responses to the tape.
The issue of skin sensitivity should be assessed more
directly in future KT research. Güçhan and Mutlu
[6] pointed out that allergy and sensitivity to taping
needs to be monitored in KT research. However, the
75
safest and most effective ways to test sensitivity to
KT have not been identified. Research into the safest
KT sensitivity-testing method is warranted.
The observed improvements in gait reported by
almost all the participants in this study is consis-
tent with past research. In a case report, Fergus [30]
found that foot and ankle taping can improve align-
ment of the foot for a child with CP. Iosa et al. [31] also
found similar results with a child with CP. However,
research investigating gait improvements in paedi-
atric population groups other than CP is lacking.
Since some physiotherapists are finding gait improve-
ments from KT use with a range of paediatric groups,
further research in this area would seem promising.
The participants’ observations of postural improv-
ements are also consistent with past studies that have
employed varying taping methods to improve posture
[9, 32, 33]. For example, Unger et al. [7] found KT to
be an effective intervention when applied to the trunk
and recommended further research into methods of
truncal taping. Research directly comparing taping
methods for postural improvement would be useful
for determining whether there is one most effective
method.
The absence of empirical evidence to support clin-
ical practice is not uncommon. Sniderman, LaCh-
apelle, Rachon, and Furberg [34] argue that clinical
reasoning, driven by experience, is the key to bridging
this gap. This pragmatic approach acknowledges the
importance of flexibility and trial and error in building
clinical experience. Ross [35] defined five sources of
knowledge that guide decision making: traditional,
authority, trial and error, personal experience, and
research. Naturally, when one area is lacking, there
is increased reliance on another. Smith, Higgs, and
Ellis [36] also espoused the importance of integrating
multiple decision-making factors in evidence-based
practice. The findings of the current study reinforce
the importance of clinical experience and strong clini-
cal reasoning in evidence-based practice, particularly
when there is a lack of available research evidence.
This study also highlights the importance of conduct-
ing research on questions of real-world relevance to
clinicians.
4.1. Directions for future research
This study has several implications for future
research in this area. A number of child, parent,
and KT-knowledge factors were identified as factors
affecting the clinical decision-making of the par-
ticipants in this study. This suggests that clinician
76 C. Smart et al. / Kinesio tape in paediatric physiotherapy
decisions in past studies may have been affected by
similar factors, but variations in treatment implemen-
tation and the importance of context-based flexibility
are rarely acknowledged in the existing literature.
Future research should aim for greater transparency
regarding child tolerance, parental involvement, and
choice of technique to help maximize clinical appli-
cability. Research should also focus on the practices
engaged in by participants in this study. For exam-
ple, RCTs with children with cerebral palsy, focusing
on specific GMFCS level I-III, comparing the effects
of different KT application methods and durations
for specific gait and posture issues are needed.
Researchers in this area should also report the main
treatment to which the taping is an adjunct, the train-
ing provided to clinicians, the treatment durations and
precise taping methods, the skin sensitivity assess-
ments used, and the reasons behind any deviations
from the initial protocol. Researchers should also use
and report on outcome measures which are able to
be employed by practitioners in their practice to help
improve their clinical practice. Ideally, both short-
term and longer-term effects of KT on children’s
functioning should also be assessed. The outcomes
of such research would provide valuable guidance to
clinicians.
4.2. Limitations
The scope of this study was limited to identifying
the experiences of physiotherapists using KT with
children. No conclusions about the frequency of use
or the effectiveness of KT in paediatric practice can
be drawn. This study did not investigate the views of
the patients or their parents; nor the veracity of the
physiotherapists’ accounts. This study also did not
focus on other types of therapeutic tape.
This study was limited only to physiotherapists
practicing within Australia. It should be acknowl-
edged that other health professionals may also use
KT. The small sample size (nine respondents) also
meant that data saturation was probably not achieved.
However, data saturation might be an unrealistic
goal, due to the evidently varied nature of paediatric
physiotherapists’ experiences with KT. The sample
size was of course restricted by the requirement of
two years’ experience, as KT is only an emerging
treatment tool. Moreover, only three of the survey
respondents consented to being interviewed, limit-
ing the extent to which the survey themes could be
probed. However, while a larger sample size and
more follow-up interviews may have uncovered more
unresolved questions and directions for further re-
search, the nature of the conclusions that could be
drawn would not likely have changed.
Notwithstanding its limitations, this study has
found that some physiotherapists are using KT in the
absence of evidence-based guidelines, in ways that
have not yet been empirically tested. The strength
of these findings is not detracted by the limitations
acknowledged here.
5. Conclusion
The aim of this study was to investigate physiother-
apists’ real-world experiences with KT in paediatric
practice. It was found that physiotherapists are using
KT for a variety of purposes, believing it to be ben-
eficial for facilitating muscle activation, particularly
for improving gait and posture. However, there was
little agreement amongst participants regarding how
the tape is best applied and for how long. There is
a corresponding lack of empirical evidence on these
questions. A promising direction for future research
would be RCTs focused on the effectiveness of KT
as an adjunct therapy in improving children’s pos-
ture and gait, directly comparing specific application
methods and durations. It is hoped that the current
study prompts further research to help maximise the
effective use of KT, to enhance the lives of children
who might benefit.
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflict of interest to report.
References
[1] Carey H, Long T. The paediatric physical therapist’s role
in promoting and participation in children with disabilities.
Pediatr Phys Ther. 2012;24:163-70.
[2] Cunha A, Lima-Alvarez C, Rocha A, Tudella E. Effects of
elastic therapeutic taping on motor function in children with
motor impairments: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil.
2018;40:1609-17.
[3] Novak I, Morgan C, Fahey M, Finch-Edmondson M, Galea
C, Hines A, et al. State of the evidence traffic lights 2019:
systematic review of interventions for preventing and treat-
ing children with cerebral palsy. Curr Neurol and Neurosci
Rep. 2020;20:3.
[4] Kase K, Wallis J, Kase T. Clinical therapeutic applications
of the kinesio taping method. 3rd ed. New Mexico: Kinesio
Taping Association International; 2013.
 C. Smart et al. / Kinesio tape in paediatric physiotherapy
[5] Kinesio. What is the kinesio taping method? [Internet]. New
Mexico: Kinesio Holding Corporation; 2016 [cited 2020 Jun
20]. Available from: https://kinesiotaping.com/about/what-
is-the-kinesio-taping-method/
[6] Guchan Z, Mutlu A. The effectiveness of taping on children
with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. Dev Med Child
Neurol. 2017;59:26-30.
[7] Unger M, Carstens J, Fernandes N, Pretorius R, Pronk S,
Robinson A, et al. The efficacy of kinesiology taping for
improving gross motor function in children with cerebral
palsy: A systematic review. S Afr J Physiother. 2018;74:459.
[8] Footer C. The effects of therapeutic taping on gross motor
function in children with cerebral palsy. Pediatr Phys Ther.
2006;18:245-52.
[9] Simsek T, Turkucuoglu B, Cokal N, Ustunbas G, Simsek
I. The effects of Kinesio® taping on sitting posture, func-
tional independence and gross motor function in children
with cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33:2058-63.
[10] Ohman A. The immediate effect of kinesiology taping on
muscular imbalance in the lateral flexors of the neck in
infants: a randomized masked study. Am J Phys Med Reha-
bil. 2015;7:494-8.
[11] Ohman A. The Immediate Effect of Kinesiology Taping on
Muscular Imbalance for Infants With Congenital Muscular
Torticollis. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;4:504-8.
[12] Giray E, Karadag-Saygi E, Mansiz-Kaplan B, Tokgoz D,
Bayindir O, Kayhan O. A randomized, single-blinded pilot
study evaluating the effects of kinesiology taping and the
tape application techniques in addition to therapeutic exer-
cises in the treatment of congenital muscular torticollis. Clin
Rehabil. 2017;31:1098-106.
[13] Atici Y, Aydin C, Atici A, Buyukkuscu M, Arikan Y,
Balioglu M. The effect of kinesio taping on back pain in
patients with Lenke Type 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis:
A randomized controlled trial. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc.
2017;51:191-6.
[14] Russo S, Rodriguez L, Kozin S, Zlotolow D, Chafetz R, Kil-
lelea C, et al. Therapeutic taping for scapular stabilization
in children with brachial plexus birth palsy. Am J Occup
Ther. 2016;70:1-11.
[15] Walsh SF. Treatment of a brachial plexus injury
using kinesiotape and exercise. Physiother Theory Pract.
2010;26:490-6.
[16] Yasukawa A, Patel P, Sisung C. Pilot study: investigating
the effects of Kinesio Taping in an acute paediatric rehabil-
itation setting. Am J Occup Ther. 2006;60:104-10.
[17] Viergever R, Rademaker C. Finding better ways to fill gaps
in paediatric health research. J Pediatr. 2014;133:824-6.
[18] Drisko JW, Maschi T. Basic content analysis. New York:
Oxford University Press; 2015.
[19] Palinkas L, Horwitz S, Green C, Wisdom J, Duan N, Hoag-
wood K. Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection
and analysis in mixed method implementation research.
Adm Policy Ment Health. 2015;42:533-44.
[20] Noy C. Sampling knowledge: The hermeneutics of snowball
sampling in qualitative research. Int J Soc Res Methodol.
2008;11:327-44.
77
[21] Liamputtong P. Research methods in health: foundations for
evidence based practice. Melbourne, AU: Oxford University
Press; 2013.
[22] Skeat J. Using grounded theory in health research. In:
Liamputtong P, editor. Research methods in health: foun-
dations for evidence based practice. 2nd ed. Melbourne:
Oxford University Press; 2013. p. 105.
[23] Erlingsson C, Brysiewicz P. A hands-on guide to doing
content analysis. Afr J Emerg Med. 2017;7:93-9.
[24] Cepeda J, Fishweicher A, Gleeson M, Greenwood S,
Motyka-Miller C. Does kinesio taping of the abdominal
muscles improve the supine-to-sit transition in children
with hypotonia [Internet]. [publisher unknown]; 2008
[cited 2020 Jun 20]. Available from: https://pdfs.semantics
cholar.org/d362/e0bd0186b22e0b8c47b97cf21189a8728
928.pdf
[25] da Costa C, Rodrigues F, Leal F, Rocha N. Pilot study:
investigating the effects of kinesio taping® on functional
activities in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Neurorehabil.
2013;16:121-8.
[26] Shevell M, Dagenais L, Hall N, Consortium R. Comorbidi-
ties in cerebral palsy and their relationship to neurologic
subtype and GMFCS level. Neurology. 2009;72:2090-6.
[27] Iosa M. The application of kinesio taping in children with
cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2015;57:11-2.
[28] Christiansen A, Lange C. Intermittent versus continuous
physiotherapy in children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med
Child Neurol. 2008;50:290-3.
[29] Gatt M, Willis S, Leuschner S. A meta-analysis of the effec-
tiveness and safety of kinesiology taping in the management
of cancer-related lymphoedema. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl).
2017;26:12510.
[30] Fergus A. A novel mobility device to improve walking for a
child with cerebral palsy. paediatric physical therapy. Pedi-
atr Phys Ther. 2017;29:1-7.
[31] Iosa M, Morelli D, Nanni M, Veredice C, Marro T, Medici A,
et al. Functional taping: a promising technique for children
with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010;52:587-9.
[32] Elbasan B, Akaya K, Akyuz M, Oskay D. Effects of
neuromuscular electrical stimulation and kinesio Taping
applications in children with cerebral palsy on postural
control and sitting balance. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil.
2018;31:49-55.
[33] Karabay I, Dogan A, Ekiz T, Koseoglu BF, Ersoz M. Train-
ing postural control and sitting in children with cerebral
palsy: kinesio taping vs. neuromuscular electrical stimula-
tion. Complement Ther Clin Pract. 2016;24:67-72.
[34] Sniderman A, LaChapelle K, Rachon N, Furberg C. The
necessity for clinical reasoning in the era of evidence-based
medicine. Mayo Clin Proc. 2013;88:1108-14.
[35] Ross T. A survival guide for health research methods. Maid-
enhead, UK: McGraw-Hill Education; 2012.
[36] Smith M, Higgs J, Ellis E. Factors influencing clinical deci-
sion making. In: Higgs J, editor. Clinical reasoning in the
health professions. 3rd ed. Edinburgh: Elsevier, Churchill
Livingstone; 2008. p. 98.