Observational studyEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2024
Digital technologies for pediatric rehabilitation: current access and use in the European Rehatech4child survey.
Observational study in European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Using game performance measure to assess upper limb motor function in children with neuromotor disorders: a systematic review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Pooled it
- Electrotherapy in Pediatric Rehabilitation: A Structured Narrative Review of Clinical Applications, Treatment Parameters, Safety, and Evidence Gaps.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Implementing Rehabilitation Robotics in Routine Care: A Mapping Review of Service Delivery Models, Implementation Determinants, Strategies, and Real-World Outcomes.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Explaining the Use Behavior of Digital Technologies in Pediatric Rehabilitation: Structural Equation Modeling Analysis of a Cross-Sectional European Survey.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- User-Centered Demand Analysis for a Virtual Reality Pelvic Floor Rehabilitation System: Cross-Sectional Study Using the Kano Model.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Barriers and Facilitators to the 3 Sides of Extended Reality-Rehabilitation Adoption: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2026Article
- Barriers and levers to using an app for motor function assessment by therapists in hospitals: A qualitative study of the MFM-Play app.PloS one · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDigital technologies such as robotics and treadmill-systems (RobTS), virtual-reality and active video-gaming (VR-AVG), and telehealth and apps (T&Apps) used within pediatric motor rehabilitation may promote recovery and improve function. However, digital technology uptake may be limited in clinical practice.
aimTo explore access to and use of digital technologies for pediatric motor rehabilitation (DT4R) in Europe as a function of individual and environmental factors, as well as potential barriers to their use.
designThis observational study was based on RehaTech4child, a cross-sectional survey (2022), supported by the European Academy of Childhood Disability.
settingOnline survey available in 20 European languages. POPULATION: The survey was disseminated through convenience and snowball sampling to pediatric motor rehabilitation professionals in Europe.
methodsThe survey included items on outcomes (access, use, purposes of use and intention to use for the three categories of DT4R, i.e. RobTS, VR-AVG and T&Apps), determinants (socio-demographics, rehabilitation practice) and barriers. The association between access and use, and individual and environmental determinants was assessed using logistic regression adjusted for age, gender and profession.
resultsOf the 1397 responses received, 635 were included. Respectively 67.7% and 74.3% of respondents reported using and having access to at least one of the three categories of DT4R. T&Apps and VR-AVG were used by 50.8% and 45.5% of respondents, respectively, and RobTS by 36.6% (P<0.001). Ease of access was the main determinant of use and frequency of use. Individual (e.g. age) and environmental (e.g. healthcare facility, patients' age) factors were access determinants. At least 70% of professionals intended to use a DT4R if available. Lack of financial resources and training were the most frequently reported severe barriers.
conclusionsThis study found that DT4R were already used in clinical practice by around two-thirds of respondents and that they generally wished to use them even more. Access was the main determinant of use and frequency of use. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: To facilitate access and use of DT4R, infrastructure and financial resources should be outlined, and training opportunities provided for professionals. Practice guidance should be developed and adapted for specific age groups and rehabilitation goals.
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.