SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Evaluating the impact of movement representation techniques on recovery outcomes in post-orthopaedic surgery individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundAlthough movement representation techniques has originally been used in neurological rehabilitation, growing researches suggests that it may also introduce advantageous effects to individuals with orthopaedic injuries. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effects of these techniques on pain, range of motion, muscle strength, functional performance and fear of movement in individuals after orthopaedic surgeries.
methodFive electronic databases were searched until April 2024. Two reviewers independently conducted study selection and data extraction. Randomized controlled studies containing individuals after limb surgeries were identified. The quality of enrolled studies and the overall certainty of evidence was assessed by scales, respectively. Egger's test and funnel plot were used to assess publication bias. Subgroup analysis was also conducted to explore the source of heterogeneity.
resultsTwenty-one randomized controlled trials involving 659 postsurgical participants were identified. The meta-analysis suggested moderate-quality evidence of a positive effect on pain intensity (SMD=-0.85; 95% CI -1.26, -0.43; p < 0.001). A low quality of evidence pointed toward a positive effect on functional scales (SMD=-0.84, 95% CI -1.27, -0.41, p < 0.001) and range of motion (SMD = 0.8, 95% CI 0.24, 1.35, p = 0.005). The very low quality of evidence suggested a significant effect on the functional test results (SMD=-0.8, 95% CI -1.01, -0.58, p < 0.001). The results remained nonsignificant for muscle strength and fear of movement. Intervention quantity, Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) score and intervention content were the sources of heterogeneity for pain intensity, functional scale score and range of motion, respectively.
conclusionCompared with conventional rehabilitation, movement representation techniques increase pain relief, functional performance and range of motion. Our results support the use of mental practice techniques in individuals after orthopaedic surgeries, with moderate to very low-quality evidence. REVIEW REGISTRATION: This trial was registered on PROSPERO on 10 August, 2024 (CRD42024583380).
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.