What question did this study set out to answer?

The study aims to map evidence on rehabilitation technologies, assessing their effectiveness and identifying limitations in clinical use.

May 14, 2026Open Access

The adoption of innovative technologies in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine: state of the art and unmet needs

Puntos clave

The study aims to map evidence on rehabilitation technologies, assessing their effectiveness and identifying limitations in clinical use.
Screened eligible studies based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Extracted data focusing on rehabilitation domains, technological interventions, and Health Technology Assessment aspects.
Identified and analyzed 623 systematic reviews from 5124 records.
56.8% of studies focused on neurological conditions, 23.7% on musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and 11.5% on cardiovascular issues.
Most studied technologies included virtual reality (28.5%), non-invasive brain stimulation (18.7%), and robotics (16.3%).
Only 4.8% of studies considered Health Technology Assessment aspects, emphasizing the need for real-world implementation research.

Resumen

BACKGROUND: The integration of innovative technologies in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) has significantly advanced patient care, enhancing functional recovery and optimizing rehabilitation processes. Despite growing clinical adoption, a translational gap persists between technological advancements and routine clinical implementation. This study aims to map the available evidence on rehabilitation technologies, identifying their applications, effectiveness, and existing limitations. METHODS: , 2024. Eligible studies were screened based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data extraction focused on rehabilitation domains, technological interventions, target populations, and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) aspects. RESULTS: Of 5124 identified records, 623 systematic reviews (12.2%) met the inclusion criteria. Neurological conditions represented the primary focus (56.8%), followed by musculoskeletal (23.7%) and cardiovascular rehabilitation (11.5%). The most frequently studied technologies included virtual reality (28.5%), non-invasive brain stimulation (18.7%), robotics (16.3%), and telerehabilitation (13.4%). Most studies assessed motor recovery (45%), pain management (22%), and cognitive or language rehabilitation (18%). Only 4.8% addressed HTA aspects such as cost-effectiveness and acceptability, highlighting a gap in real-world implementation studies. CONCLUSIONS: This mapping review underscores the increasing interest in technology-assisted rehabilitation but also highlights critical gaps, particularly in HTA assessments and training for PRM specialists. Standardized guidelines, structured training programs, and economic evaluations are essential to optimize integrating rehabilitation technologies into clinical practice. Further research should focus on long-term efficacy, accessibility, and sustainability to ensure equitable access to innovative rehabilitation solutions.

Leer artículo completoexternamente

Preguntar a la IA

Me gusta

Guardar

Ver artículo completo