SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2020
Technology for monitoring everyday prosthesis use: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Wearable Technology and Machine Learning for Prediction of Performance-Based and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Pooled it
- Therapeutic benefits of lower limb prostheses: a systematic review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Pooled it
- The influence of powered prostheses on user perspectives, metabolics, and activity: a randomized crossover trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2021Trial
- Effective Interventions in Restoring Mobility and Relieving Pain After Lower Limb Amputation.Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine · 2026Article
- Commercial Versus Custom-Made Cock-Up Orthoses: A Randomized Cross-Over Analysis of Dexterity and Satisfaction in Female Office Employees.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Physical activity levels are low in the days, weeks, and months following dysvascular major lower limb amputation.Journal of rehabilitation medicine · 2026Observational
- Development of a Low-Cost Mechanical Hand Prosthesis with Varied Grasp Positions.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Artificial-Intelligence-Driven Electromyography Adaptation for Elderly Assistance at Physiological, Functional, and Behavioral Levels.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 2026Article
- Innovative 3D-printed internal structure in silicone partial-hand prostheses: Enhancing function and mechanical performance.Canadian prosthetics & orthotics journal · 2026Article
- Interlimb training improves motor function in partial-hand but not necessarily transradial simulated prosthesis use.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- How To Improve Patient Selection in Individuals With Lower Extremity Amputation Using a Bone-anchored Prosthesis.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2025Article
- Evaluation of activity and function before and immediately after the provision of a microprocessor knee in individuals with transfemoral amputation.Prosthetics and orthotics international · 2025Observational
- Introducing an adjustable upper limb prosthesis into a Ugandan clinical service: impacts on free living behaviour and prosthetic use.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Wearable and Thermal Drift-Compensated Monitoring System Based on Fiber Bragg Grating Sensors for a 3D-Printed Foot Prosthesis.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- A Pneumatically Controlled Prosthetic Socket for Transfemoral Amputees.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Use of mobile phones for rehabilitative services among prosthetics users in rural Acholi sub-region of northern Uganda: findings from a qualitative study.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022Article
- High-Level Mobility of Trans-Tibial Prosthesis Users Wearing Commercial and sPace Energy-Storing Prosthetic Feet.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- A novel portable sensor to monitor bodily positions and activities in transtibial prosthesis users.Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon) · 2022Article
- Internet of Things for beyond-the-laboratory prosthetics research.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2022Article
- Competitive motivation increased home use and improved prosthesis self-perception after Cybathlon 2020 for neuromusculoskeletal prosthesis user.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding how prostheses are used in everyday life is central to the design, provision and evaluation of prosthetic devices and associated services. This paper reviews the scientific literature on methodologies and technologies that have been used to assess the daily use of both upper- and lower-limb prostheses. It discusses the types of studies that have been undertaken, the technologies used to monitor physical activity, the benefits of monitoring daily living and the barriers to long-term monitoring, with particular focus on low-resource settings.
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL and EMBASE of studies that monitored the activity of prosthesis users during daily-living.
resultsSixty lower-limb studies and 9 upper-limb studies were identified for inclusion in the review. The first studies in the lower-limb field date from the 1990s and the number has increased steadily since the early 2000s. In contrast, the studies in the upper-limb field have only begun to emerge over the past few years. The early lower-limb studies focused on the development or validation of actimeters, algorithms and/or scores for activity classification. However, most of the recent lower-limb studies used activity monitoring to compare prosthetic components. The lower-limb studies mainly used step-counts as their only measure of activity, focusing on the amount of activity, not the type and quality of movements. In comparison, the small number of upper-limb studies were fairly evenly spread between development of algorithms, comparison of everyday activity to clinical scores, and comparison of different prosthesis user populations. Most upper-limb papers reported the degree of symmetry in activity levels between the arm with the prosthesis and the intact arm.
conclusionsActivity monitoring technology used in conjunction with clinical scores and user feedback, offers significant insights into how prostheses are used and whether they meet the user's requirements. However, the cost, limited battery-life and lack of availability in many countries mean that using sensors to understand the daily use of prostheses and the types of activity being performed has not yet become a feasible standard clinical practice. This review provides recommendations for the research and clinical communities to advance this area for the benefit of prosthesis users.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.