Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37794182›Full record

SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2023

Mobile technologies for rehabilitation in non-specific spinal disorders: a systematic review of the efficacy and potential for implementation in low- and middle-income countries.

Pénielle Mahutchegnon Mitchaï, Jean Mapinduzi, Jonas Verbrugghe, Sarah Michiels, Lotte Janssens, Oyéné Kossi, Bruno Bonnechère, Annick Timmermans

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Empowering sickle cell disease care: the rise ofFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2024
    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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Pénielle Mahutchegnon MitchaïREVAL, Rehabilitation Research Center, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Jean MapinduziREVAL, Rehabilitation Research Center, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Jonas VerbruggheREVAL, Rehabilitation Research Center, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Sarah MichielsREVAL, Rehabilitation Research Center, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Lotte JanssensREVAL, Rehabilitation Research Center, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Oyéné KossiREVAL, Rehabilitation Research Center, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium. oyene.kossi@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9117-7191
Bruno BonnechèreREVAL, Rehabilitation Research Center, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Annick TimmermansREVAL, Rehabilitation Research Center, Hasselt University, Diepenbeek, Belgium.
Hasselt University · BEUniversité de Parakou · BJLight University of Bujumbur · BI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this systematic review was primarily to identify the types of mHealth technologies for the rehabilitation of non-specific spinal disorders, second to evaluate their efficacy, and finally to determine their applicability in LMICs.

methodsThree databases (Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science) were searched for randomized controlled trials and clinical trials from January 2012 until December 2022. Studies were found eligible when using mHealth technologies for the rehabilitation of non-specific spinal disorders. To evaluate efficacy, the primary outcome was pain intensity, and the secondary outcomes were disability and quality of life. To evaluate the applicability in LMICs, information about financial and geographical accessibility, offline usability, and languages was extracted.

resultsFifteen studies were included comprising 1828 participants who suffer from non-specific low back pain (86.05%) and non-specific neck pain (13.95%). Fourteen distinct smartphone-based interventions and two sensor system interventions were found, with a duration ranging from four weeks to six months. All mHealth interventions demonstrated efficacy for the improvement of pain, disability and quality of life in non-specific spinal disorders, particularly low back pain. Five of the evaluated smartphone applications were free of charge accessible and had language features that could be adapted for use in LMICs.

conclusionmHealth interventions can be used and integrated into the conventional treatment of non-specific spinal disorders in rehabilitation. They have demonstrated efficacy and could be implemented in LMICs with minor adaptations to overcome language barriers and the absolute necessity of the internet.

Indexed as

Low Back PainSpinal DiseasesTelemedicineDeveloping CountriesHumansQuality of LifeBiopsychosocial factorsChronic low back painPrevalence

Identifiers

PMID37794182
OpenAlexW4387331689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.