Kinesiology Taping (KT), an elastic therapeutic tape developed in the 1970s by chiropractor Dr. Kenso Kase, is widely used for treating sports injuries and various other disorders (Tran et al., 2023). KT is reportedly different to standard athletic tape in that it provides support but an unrestricted range of movement; this is theorized to allow KT to facilitate muscle function and enhance neuromuscular control (Yin, 2020). KT has become increasingly popular in recent times, becoming increasingly evident in various sports and a diverse range of athletes with various injuries (Bischoff et al., 2018; Nunes et al., 2021). The proposed beneficial effects of KT have led to it becoming part of the daily treatment and rehabilitation programs of many sporting therapists (Dolphin et al., 2021). It is proposed to activate the pain-suppressing system and release the compression on nociceptors to relieve the pain (Montalvo et al., 2014; Deng et al., 2021). Additionally, KT is suggested to enhance lower-extremity muscle activity, strength, and tone, as well as dynamic stability (Kim and Kim, 2021). Studies have also demonstrated significant improvements in gait functions (Biz et al., 2022) and agility performance (Sarvestan et al., 2018). These enhancements have potential implications for the prevention of sports injuries and in reducing the overall incidence of injuries (Williams et al., 2012). This evidence further supports the diverse applications of Kinesio Tape in both therapeutic and athletic settings, underscoring its value as a multifunctional tool in sports medicine and physical therapy.

Despite these proposed physiological benefits, the enhancement of balance induced by KT has not been widely recognized, with a wide range of contradictory studies (Torres et al., 2016; Bischoff et al., 2018; Gholami et al., 2020). Balance is considered a key component of normal daily activities, such as walking, running, and climbing stairs (Lengkana et al., 2020). Proper balance will enable a person to perform activities or movements effectively, and the functional integration of multiple systems in developing excellent balance is fundamental to sporting and functional success (Conner et al., 2019). Balance activities are also crucial to successful performance and injury prevention programs (Pérez-Gómez et al., 2022). Any intervention that can improve balance, therefore, has the potential to improve performance and help prevent injury. However, little is known about KT’s effects on improving balance. Some evidence has been published that has attempted to gain an understanding of KT’s impact on muscle function and improving balance (Kim et al., 2014; Hosp et al., 2017; Zulfikri and Justine, 2017). KT can increase sensory feedback from mechanoreceptors in the skin, muscles, and joint capsules (Hosp et al., 2017). The afferent feedback of mechanoreceptors may assist in maintaining muscle spindle information accuracy, which contributes to improving proprioception (Kase, 2003). Increased proprioception provides more sensory signals to the central nervous system by integrating proprioceptive information, improving joint position sense during static and dynamic conditions (Kim et al., 2014). These mechanisms are thought to improve the efficiency of the neuromuscular system and minimize postural sway, thereby improving the ability to maintain balance efficiently during movement (Zulfikri and Justine, 2017).

Two distinct circumstances are associated with different postural control dynamics and strategies: (1) static balance and (2) dynamic balance. Static balance is the body’s ability to remain relatively stable, with the most minor movement when standing on one leg (Lengkana et al., 2020). Dynamic balance refers to the body’s capacity to maintain its position and stability in response to perturbations (Lengkana et al., 2020). Given that the evidence on the effect of KT in balance outcomes is currently lacking, this study aims to explore whether KT has any immediate effects on the quadriceps muscles for improving static and dynamic balance compared with the control condition of no taping in healthy subjects during landing from a hop and Y Balance test.

A total of 27 healthy adults (13 males and 14 females) who met the inclusion and exclusion criteria participated in the study. All subjects completed all two testing sessions on the same day without anyone withdrawing. Only one subject (1 female) felt slightly uncomfortable after completing the tests. However, the discomfort disappeared within 12 h. The demographic data of the subject’s age, height, and weight, including means and standard deviations, is presented in Table 1.

The YBTCS within the taping group showed an increase from 1.02 in the pre-test to 1.05 in the post-test, whereas the control group remained nearly unchanged (pre-test 1.05, post-test 1.04) (see Table 2). Statistical analysis revealed a significant improvement in YBTCS for the condition (F = 7.60, p = 0.01), while no significant changes were observed for time (F = 0.55, p = 0.47) (see Table 3). For the COPE, both the taping and control groups demonstrated similar mean values from pre-test to post-test, with the KT group changing from 0.06 m (SD = 0.05) to 0.07 m (SD = 0.06) and the control group from 0.07 m (SD = 0.05) to 0.06 m (SD = 0.04) (see Table 2), with no statistically significant differences found either by condition (F = 0.00, p = 0.99) or over time (F = 0.01, p = 0.94) (see Table 3). Similarly, the TTS showed no significant changes, with the taping group changing from a pre-test mean of 2.65 s (SD = 1.74) to a post-test mean of 2.34 s (SD = 1.11), and the control group from 2.38 s (SD = 1.15) to 2.37 s (SD = 1.01) (see Table 2), with no significant effects due to condition (F = 0.34, p = 0.57) or time (F = 0.27, p = 0.61) (see Table 3).

Our results predominantly indicate that the application of KT to the quadriceps muscle significantly enhances dynamic balance as measured by the YBTCS, displaying both statistical significance and a moderate to large effect size. This underscores the substantial practical impact of KT on dynamic balance. Conversely, KT did not show statistical significance in improving dynamic balance according to the TTS and static balance assessed by the COPE. However, the effect sizes for TTS and COPE were small to moderate, suggesting that KT may still have some practical influence on balance despite the lack of statistical significance. These findings highlight the multifaceted role of KT and its varied influence on different aspects of balance.

Although statistically significant, the observed change in the YBTCS of 0.03 m, representing a 1 cm change in each movement of three directions, raises questions about clinical significance. The limited improvement in YBTCS, coupled with the absence of statistically significant differences in TTS and COPE within this study, might potentially be attributable to the sample comprising healthy participants. Hosp et al. proposed the hypothesis that individuals with already “normal” balance abilities may not derive noticeable benefits from external proprioceptive aids, whereas those with impaired proprioception could be more responsive to such interventions (Hosp et al., 2015). This implies that KT might primarily benefit those with poor proprioceptive capabilities or sports injuries. The study by de Almeida Lins et al. (2013) aligns with our findings, as it also observed no significant effect of KT on neuromuscular balance performance among healthy individuals (De Almeida Lins et al., 2013). Another study also found that KT had no effect on knee proprioception in healthy subjects (Torres et al., 2016). Conversely, most research indicates a positive influence of KT on proprioception in patients with traumatic injuries (Williams et al., 2012; Morris et al., 2013; Simon et al., 2014). The findings from another study seem to reinforce this observation, demonstrating that athletes with chronic ankle instability have demonstrated KT’s effectiveness in reducing postural sway during movements and offers a moderate stabilizing effect on the ankles (Biz et al., 2022). These findings highlight the necessity for future research to explore the differential effects of KT between healthy individuals and those with injuries.

The duration for KT remains on the skin may also be a potential reason for its effectiveness. In the current study, the post-test for assessing balance was conducted immediately following the application of KT. Jackson and colleagues found that maintaining KT on the targeted muscle for 48 h could improve static balance, and these improvements persisted for 72 h after removing the tape (Jackson et al., 2016). According to the underlying mechanisms of KT, it might activate skin mechanoreceptors, potentially enhancing muscle spindle reflexes and increasing motor unit excitability over time (Yeung and Yeung, 2016). The body adjusts to the continuous sensory feedback provided by the stimulus, maintaining some effects even after the stimulus has been removed (Simon et al., 2014). Another study assessing the impact of the KT technique on balance in patients with chronic ankle instability found that applying KT for 48–72 h significantly improved balance deficits in these patients (Tetuan, 2014). Consequently, extended KT applications might enhance muscle activation capabilities more effectively than shorter applications, potentially improving balance. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution as insufficient research examining the physiological mechanisms, and further research is thus warranted to fully understand the tape’s long-term effects on balance and muscle activity.

It is also possible that COPE was affected by the KT of single target muscle and measurement tools. In the current study, the static balance was assessed by COPE during the landing from a hop test, which required subjects to land steadily on the force platform and stand with one leg for 30 s. This mainly reflects the whole lower limb’s static balance, such as the hip and ankle joints, rather than only the knee joint. It is hard to detect the apparent change of COPE for static balance when KT was applied only to the knee joints of the participants. The findings of the current study that KT has no immediate effect on static balance are in contrast with the findings of others (Bischoff et al., 2018). Bischoff and his colleagues focused on knee proprioception through the assessment of joint position sense (JPS), which enables accurate assessment of the relative localisation and movement of a particular joint in space, as well as enabling measurement of tension, effort, and balance. Thus, the improvement in static balance shown in the study of Bischoff et al. (2018) was more easily detected than in the current study. The results of another study by Torres and his colleagues reinforce this theory (Torres et al., 2016). They investigated the effect of KT on knee proprioception by assessing JPS and threshold to detect passive movement (TTDPM) in healthy participants. They found that KT positively impacts knee proprioception, although there was only marginal improvement in JPS.

The main limitation of the present study was the use of healthy individuals because participants with poor balance are more likely to benefit from KT than healthy participants. Another limitation may be that no placebo group exists in the current study. The intervention of KT without tension as the placebo group can exclude the effect of KT on cutaneous stimulation. The washout period of only 90 min may be another limitation. The residual effects of KT and remembering and learning from tests influence the results due to the short washout period used in the current study. Another potential limitation of this study is the small sample size. Future research should involve a larger cohort of participants to validate and enhance the generalizability of our findings.

This study investigated the immediate effects of KT on static and dynamic balance in healthy individuals. While KT demonstrated a significant improvement in dynamic balance as measured by the YBTCS, it did not significantly impact static balance, as assessed through the COPE and TTS measures. These results suggest that KT may enhance dynamic balance capabilities in a healthy population, although its effects on static balance appear limited under the conditions tested. The significant findings related to dynamic balance highlight KT’s potential utility in sports and rehabilitation settings where dynamic movement plays a critical role. However, further investigation is necessary, particularly involving a broader range of participants, including those with balance disorders, to explore the benefits of KT more comprehensively.

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

The studies involving humans were approved by Cardiff University of School of Healthcare Sciences ethics committee. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

TZ: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. LH: Data curation, Writing – original draft. FH: Formal analysis, Writing – original draft. TS: Project administration, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. XH: Resources, Supervision, Writing – review & editing.