Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32872138›Full record

Observational studySensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Daily Life Benefits and Usage Characteristics of Dynamic Arm Supports in Subjects with Neuromuscular Disorders.

Johannes Essers, Alessio Murgia, Anneliek Peters, Kenneth Meijer

Registry-linked trialAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07121075 (The Effects of a Dynamic Arm Support in Daily Life. A Mixed Methods Study Including the Different Components of the ICF), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT07121075 recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

The Effects of a Dynamic Arm Support in Daily Life. A Mixed Methods Study Including the Different Components of the ICF

TypeobservationalSponsorHasselt UniversityRan2024 to 2026Enrolled50ConditionsNeuromuscular Disease, Neuromuscular Disability, Assistive Technology, Activities of Daily LivingArmsDynamic arm support
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Johannes EssersDepartment of Nutrition and Movement Sciences, NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, 6229ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-0961-3167
Alessio MurgiaDepartment of Human Movement Sciences, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, 9713AV Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-1600-4623
Anneliek PetersDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, 9713AV Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-3966-8748
Kenneth MeijerDepartment of Nutrition and Movement Sciences, NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, 6229ER Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8236-8754

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Symbionics Perspectief Program project 13523 ADAPT
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuromuscular disorders cause progressive muscular weakness, which limits upper extremity mobility and performance during activities of daily life. Dynamic arm supports can improve mobility and quality of life. However, their use is often discontinued over time for unclear reasons. This study aimed to evaluate whether users of dynamic arm supports demonstrate and perceive quantifiable mobility benefits over a period of two months. Nine users of dynamic arm supports were included in this observational study. They had different neuromuscular disorders and collectively used four different arm supports. They were observed for three consecutive weeks during which they were equipped with a multi-sensor network of accelerometers to assess the actual use of the arm support and they were asked to provide self-reports on the perceived benefits of the devices. Benefits were experienced mainly during anti-gravity activities and the measured use did not change over time. The self-reports provided contextual information in domains such as participation to social life, in addition to the sensor system. However self-reports overestimated the actual use by up to three-fold compared to the accelerometer measures. A combination of objective and subjective methods is recommended for meaningful and quantifiable mobility benefits during activities of daily life.

Indexed as

ArmNeuromuscular DiseasesQuality of LifeActivities of Daily LivingHumansSelf-Help DevicesSelf ReportUpper Extremityactivity monitoringdynamic arm supportmotor performanceneuromuscular disordersupper extremities

Identifiers

PMID32872138
PMCPMC7506722

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.