ArticlePloS one2016
Biofeedback in Partial Weight Bearing: Usability of Two Different Devices from a Patient's and Physical Therapist's Perspective.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06989554 (Efficacy of a Low-Cost Tactile Incentiviser for Improving Partial Weight-Bearing Accuracy During Early Inpatient Rehabilitation After Lower-Limb Surgery), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
Efficacy of a Low-Cost Tactile Incentiviser for Improving Partial Weight-Bearing Accuracy During Early Inpatient Rehabilitation After Lower-Limb Surgery: A Single-Centre Pilot Randomised Controlled Trial
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Is an Ambulatory Biofeedback Device More Effective than Instructing Partial Weight-Bearing Using a Bathroom Scale? Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial with Healthy Subjects.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Trial
- Can elderly individuals perform partial weight bearing on their lower limbs? A prospective cohort study using ambulatory real-time biofeedback.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Trial
- Effect of Continuous Audio Biofeedback During Postoperative Partial Weight Bearing in Older Patients-An Exploratory Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- The Effect of Postoperative Physical Therapy Following Hip Fracture: A Literature Review.Cureus · 2023Review
- Versatile GCH Control Software for Correction of Loads Applied to Forearm Crutches During Gait Recovery Through Technological Feedback: Development and Implementation Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Observational
- Design and Development of a Virtual Reality-Based Mobility Training Game for People With Parkinson's Disease.Frontiers in neurology · 2020Article
- Usability Testing of an Interactive Dashboard for Surgical Quality Improvement in a Large Congenital Heart Center.Applied clinical informatics · 2019Article
- Amount of Weight-Bearing During Tilt Table Inclination, With Neutral and Unilateral Knee Flexion Postures.Annals of rehabilitation medicine · 2018Article
- Partial weight bearing in hip fracture rehabilitation.Future science OA · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPartial weight bearing is frequently instructed by physical therapists in patients after lower-limb trauma or surgery. The use of biofeedback devices seems promising to improve the patient's compliance with weight-bearing instructions. SmartStep and OpenGo-Science are biofeedback devices that provide real-time feedback. For a successful implementation, usability of the devices is a critical aspect and should be tested from a user's perspective.
aimTo describe the usability from the physical therapists' and a patients' perspective of Smartstep and OpenGo-Science to provide feedback on partial weight bearing during supervised rehabilitation of patients after lower-limb trauma or surgery.
methodsIn a convergent mixed-methods design, qualitative and quantitative data were collected. Usability was subdivided into user performance, satisfaction and acceptability. Patients prescribed with partial weight bearing and their physical therapists were asked to use SmartStep and OpenGo-Science during supervised rehabilitation. Usability was qualitatively tested by a think-aloud method and a semi-structured interview and quantitatively tested by the System-Usability-Scale (SUS) and closed questions. For the qualitative data thematic content analyses were used.
resultsNine pairs of physical therapists and their patients participated. The mean SUS scores for patients and physical therapists were for SmartStep 70 and 53, and for OpenGo-Science 79 and 81, respectively. Scores were interpreted with the Curved Grading Scale. The qualitative data showed that there were mixed views and perceptions from patients and physical therapists on satisfaction and acceptability.
conclusionThis study gives insight in the usability of two biofeedback devices from the patient's and physical therapist's perspective. The overall usability from both perspectives seemed to be acceptable for OpenGo-Science. For SmartStep, overall usability seemed only acceptable from the patient's perspective. IMPLICATION: The study findings could help clinicians to decide which biofeedback device is appropriate for their given situation and provide information for future development of biofeedback devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.