Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Kinesio taping for sports injuries
  1. Steven J Kamper1,2,
  2. Nicholas Henschke3
  1. 1EMGO+ Institute, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  2. 2Musculoskeletal Division, The George Institute for Global Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  3. 3Institute of Public Health, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Dr Steven Kamper, The George Institute for Global Health, University of Sydney PO Box M201, Missenden Rd, Camperdown, NSW 2050, Australia; skamper{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

This section features a recent systematic review that is indexed on PEDro, the Physiotherapy Evidence Database ( PEDro is a free, web-based database of evidence relevant to physiotherapy.

▸ Williams S, Whatman C, Hume PA, et al. Kinesio taping in treatment and prevention of sports injuries. A meta-analysis of the evidence for its effectiveness. Sports Med 2012;42:153–164.


Kinesio tape is a proprietary product that purports to offer a range of benefits in the treatment and prevention of various musculoskeletal conditions. Kinesio taping involves the application of elastic adhesive tape to areas of pain or dysfunction. Theorised mechanisms of action are diverse, including reduction of pain through stimulation of sensory afferents1 and increased range of motion (ROM) due to enhanced local circulation.2 Despite a recent increase in public profile due to use of kinesio taping by athletes at major sporting events, the clinical benefits of the intervention remain unclear.


To review the evidence for the effectiveness of kinesio taping for the prevention and treatment of sports injuries.

Searches and inclusion criteria

Biomedical and sports-related databases including MEDLINE, Scopus, ScienceDirect and SPORTDiscus …

View Full Text


  • Contributors SJK and NH interpreted the systematic review, wrote and reviewed drafts. Both authors accepted the final version.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.