Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39912298›Full record

ArticleJMIR serious games2025

Comparing In-Person, Standard Telehealth, and Remote Musculoskeletal Examination With a Novel Augmented Reality Exercise Game System: Pilot Cross-Sectional Comparison Study.

Richard Wu, Keerthana Chakka, Sara Belko, Ninad Khargonkar, Kevin Desai, Balakrishnan Prabhakaran, Thiru Annaswamy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR serious games, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Richard WuThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1904-1203
Keerthana ChakkaThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4203-8173
Sara BelkoSidney Kimmel Medical College at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-1657-0879
Ninad KhargonkarDepartment of Computer Science, The University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9191-0250
Kevin DesaiDepartment of Computer Science, The University of Texas at San Antonio, San Antonio, TX, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2964-8981
Balakrishnan PrabhakaranDepartment of Computer Science, The University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson, TX, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0385-8662
Thiru AnnaswamyPenn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Penn State University College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, United States.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3969-9221

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Current telemedicine technologies are not fully optimized for conducting physical examinations. The Virtual Remote Tele-Physical Examination (VIRTEPEX) system, a novel proprietary technology platform using a Microsoft Kinect-based augmented reality game system to track motion and estimate force, has the potential to assist with conducting asynchronous, remote musculoskeletal examinations. Objective: This pilot study evaluated the feasibility of the VIRTEPEX system as a supplement to telehealth musculoskeletal strength assessments. Methods: In this cross-sectional pilot study, 12 study participants with upper extremity pain and/or weakness underwent strength evaluations for four upper extremity movements using in-person, telehealth, VIRTEPEX, and composite (telehealth plus VIRTEPEX) assessments. The evaluators were blinded to each other's assessments. The primary outcome was feasibility, as determined by participant recruitment, study completion, and safety. The secondary outcome was preliminary evaluation of inter-rater agreement between in-person, telehealth, and VIRTEPEX strength assessments, including κ statistics. Results: This pilot study had an 80% recruitment rate, a 100% completion rate, and reported no adverse events. In-person and telehealth evaluations achieved highest overall agreement (85.71%), followed by agreements between in-person and composite (75%), in-person and VIRTEPEX (62.5%), and telehealth and VIRTEPEX (62.5%) evaluations. However, for shoulder flexion, agreement between in-person and VIRTEPEX evaluations (78.57%; κ=0.571, 95% CI 0.183 to 0.960) and in-person and composite evaluations (78.57%; κ=0.571, 95% CI 0.183 to 0.960) was higher than that between in-person and telehealth evaluations (71.43%; κ=0.429, 95% CI -0.025 to 0.882). Conclusions: This study demonstrates the feasibility of asynchronous VIRTEPEX examinations and supports the potential for VIRTEPEX to supplement and add value to standard telehealth platforms. Further studies with an additional development of VIRTEPEX and larger sample sizes for adequate power are warranted.

Indexed as

ARaugmented realitycross-sectionaldigital worldexerciseexergameforcegamemotionmusculoskeletalpatientphysical examinationphysical examinationsremote examinationsimulationstrengthtele-healthtelehealthtelemedicinetelerehabilitationVIRTEPEXvirtual carevirtual environmentvirtual health

Identifiers

PMID39912298
PMCPMC11822405

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.