Objective. To demonstrate whether KT is better than placebo taping, nonelastic taping, or no taping in reducing pain. Methods. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched up to 20 October 2020 for randomized controlled studies that used KT to treat chronic knee pain according to PRISMA guidelines. We extracted the mean differences and SD in pretreatment and posttreatment for selected outcomes measured in the experimental and control groups for subsequent meta-analyses. Results. In total, 8 studies involving 416 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Our results indicated that KT is better than other tapings (placebo taping or nonelastic taping) in the early four weeks. The mean difference was −1.44 (95% CI: −2.04–−0.84, I² = 49%, ). Treatment methods which were performed for more than six weeks (0.16 (95% CI: −0.35–0.68, I² = 0%, )) show no significant difference in reducing pain. In studies in which visual analogue scale was measured, a positive effect was observed for KT combined with exercise program training (−3.27 (95% CI: −3.69–2.85, I² = 0%, )). Conclusion. KT exhibited significant but temporary pain reduction.

中文翻译：

---

当前证据确实支持短期内使用KT治疗慢性膝关节疼痛：系统评价和荟萃分析

目标。证明在减轻疼痛方面，KT是否比安慰剂包扎，非弹性包扎或不包扎更好。方法。截至2020年10月20日，系统地搜索PubMed，Embase，Web of Science，Cochrane中央图书馆和ClinicalTrials.gov，以进行随机对照研究，这些研究根据PRISMA指南使用KT治疗慢性膝关节疼痛。我们提取了实验组和对照组中所选结果在治疗前和治疗后的均值差异和SD，以进行后续荟萃分析。结果。总共有416位参与者参与的8项研究符合纳入标准。我们的结果表明，在最初的四个星期中，KT优于其他录音带（安慰剂录音带或非弹性录音带）。平均差异为−1.44（95％CI：−2.04–−0.84，I ²  = 49％，）。进行了六周以上的治疗方法（0.16（95％CI：-0.35-0.68， I ²  = 0％，））在减轻疼痛方面无显着差异。在测量视觉模拟量表的研究中，观察到KT与运动计划训练相结合的积极效果（−3.27（95％CI：−3.69–2.85， I ²  = 0％，））。结论。KT表现出明显但暂时的疼痛减轻。