ReviewEFORT open reviews2026
Step count as a digital mobility outcome in orthopedics and orthopedic trauma surgery: a scoping review.
Review in EFORT open reviews, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Step Count as a Digital Mobility Outcome-A Pilot Study on Differences Between the Upper and Lower Extremities.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Observational
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
The need to collect objective outcome parameters digitally is increasing in both clinical practice and research. Step count is a frequently utilized digital mobility outcome (DMO) in orthopedic traumatology; however, its usefulness to monitor the patient recovery process remains unclear. The aim of this scoping review is to investigate the application and utility of daily patient step count as a DMO in musculoskeletal injuries. PubMed and consensus.app were queried. Eligibility criteria included the following: articles published within 20 years including patients with orthopedic trauma conditions and utilizing daily step count as an outcome. The type of study, case numbers, conditions investigated, use/usefulness of step count, duration of assessment, sensor use and location, and data harvesting specifics were assessed. Totally, 40 articles were analyzed, revealing an increasing trend in annual publications. The majority of studies were observational (93%), with a mean of 103 participants (range: 9-666). Proximal femur fractures (n = 7), anterior curciate ligament (ACL) injuries (n = 6), and joint replacement (n = 5) were the most frequently investigated conditions. Overall, 30% of studies used step count to demonstrate an association with patient-reported outcome measures, while 27% employed it to identify differences between study groups. Research-grade accelerometers/inertial measurement units (73%) were the most common sensors, with continuous measurement durations from 4 to 14 days. This review indicates an increasing use of step count as an objective DMO in the orthopedic trauma surgery literature. However, the implementation, application, setup, and data acquisition methodologies remain underexplored. This review highlights current trends and identifies key areas requiring further investigation in future research.
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.