Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35275089›Full record

ArticleJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2022

An Investigation Into the Use of mHealth in Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy: Scoping Review.

Jonathon M R Agnew, Catherine E Hanratty, Joseph G McVeigh, Chris Nugent, Daniel P Kerr

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
–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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Digital Tools to Support Postpartum Recovery: A Systematic Review.Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.) · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Quality assessment of mHealth apps: a scoping review.Frontiers in health services · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Jonathon M R Agnew *Discipline in Physiotherapy, School of Life and Health Sciences, University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0883-7748
Catherine E Hanratty *Discipline in Physiotherapy, School of Life and Health Sciences, University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2453-6021
Joseph G McVeigh *Discipline of Physiotherapy, School of Clinical Therapies, College of Medicine and Health, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0789-1419
Chris Nugent *Discipline in Computing, School of Computing, University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6295-8669
Daniel P Kerr *Discipline in Physiotherapy, School of Life and Health Sciences, University of Ulster, Newtownabbey, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4686-3058

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMusculoskeletal physiotherapy provides conservative management for a range of conditions. Currently, there is a lack of engagement with exercise programs because of the lack of supervision and low self-efficacy. The use of mobile health (mHealth) interventions could be a possible solution to this problem, helping promote self-management at home. However, there is little evidence for musculoskeletal physiotherapy on the most effective forms of mHealth.

objectiveThe aim of this review is to investigate the literature focusing on the use of mHealth in musculoskeletal physiotherapy and summarize the evidence.

methodsA scoping review of 6 peer-reviewed databases was conducted in March 2021. No date limits were applied, and only articles written in the English language were selected. A reviewer screened all the articles, followed by 2 additional researchers screening a random sample before data extraction.

resultsOf the 1393 studies, 28 (2.01%) were identified. Intervention characteristics comprised stretching and strengthening exercises, primarily for degenerative joint pain and spinal conditions (5/28, 18%). The most reported use of mHealth included telephone and videoconferencing calls to provide a home exercise program or being used as an adjunct to physiotherapy musculoskeletal assessment (14/28, 50%). Although patient satisfaction with mHealth was reported to be high, reasons for disengagement included a lack of high-quality information and poor internet speeds. Barriers to clinical uptake included insufficient training with the intervention and a lack of time to become familiar.

conclusionsmHealth has some benefits regarding treatment adherence and can potentially be as effective as normal physiotherapy care while being more cost-effective. The current use of mHealth is most effective when ongoing feedback from a health care professional is available.

Indexed as

mHealthmobile phonemusculoskeletalphysiotherapyrehabilitationscoping review

Identifiers

PMID35275089
PMCPMC8956993

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.