ReviewJournal of pain research2023
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Rehabilitation Using Digital Healthcare on Musculoskeletal Pain and Quality of Life.
Review in Journal of pain research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing the Effectiveness of Digital and Conventional Rehabilitation Aftercare on Work Ability in Orthopedic Patients: A Longitudinal Study in Germany.Journal of occupational rehabilitation · 2026Trial
- Implementation and Evaluation of an AI-Assisted Telerehabilitation System for Postdischarge Continuation of Rehabilitative Care: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Digital health interventions for perioperative patient-reported outcomes: a network meta-analysis.NPJ digital medicine · 2026Article
- Impact of a digital mindfulness and motor imagery intervention on pain and perceived function in 203 patients with musculoskeletal pain.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- PICO-based assessment and categorization of evidence for digital health interventions: an inductive framework development.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rehabilitation using digital healthcare (DHC) has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of treatment for musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and associated pain by improving patient outcomes, while being cost-effective, safe, and measurable. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of musculoskeletal rehabilitation using DHC. We searched PubMed, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library, and PEDro Physiotherapy Evidence Database from inception to October 28, 2022 for controlled clinical trials comparing DHC to conventional rehabilitation. We used a random-effects model for the meta-analysis, pooling the effects of DHC on pain and quality of life (QoL) by calculating standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between DHC rehabilitation and conventional rehabilitation (control). Fifty-four studies with 6240 participants met the inclusion criteria. The sample size ranged from 26 to 461, and the average age of the participants ranged from 21.9 to 71.8 years. The majority of the included studies focused on knee or hip joint MSD (n = 23), and the most frequently utilized DHC interventions were mobile applications (n = 26) and virtual or augmented reality (n = 16). Our meta-analysis of pain (n = 45) revealed that pain reduction was greater in DHC rehabilitation than in conventional rehabilitation (SMD: -0.55, 95% CI: -0.74, -0.36), indicating that rehabilitation using DHC has the potential to ameliorate MSD pain. Furthermore, DHC significantly improved health-related QoL and disease-specific QoL (SMD: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.29, 1.03; SMD: -0.44, 95% CI: -0.87, -0.01) compared to conventional rehabilitation. Our findings suggest that DHC offers a practical and flexible rehabilitation alternative for both patients with MSD and healthcare professionals. Nevertheless, further researches are needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms by which DHC affects patient-reported outcomes, which may vary depending on the type and design of the DHC intervention.
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.