ReviewEFORT open reviews2025
Towards a comprehensive digital wearable tracking system of the patient recovery journey after extremity trauma: a narrative review.
Review in EFORT open reviews, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Digital technology and sensors around the "patient journey" in trauma surgery].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Step Count as a Digital Mobility Outcome-A Pilot Study on Differences Between the Upper and Lower Extremities.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Observational
- Callus formation during healing is guided by local strain: a retrospective clinical observation.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Observational
- Recovery trajectories of spatiotemporal gait after bipolar hemiarthroplasty versus closed reduction and internal fixation for unstable intertrochanteric fracture: a prospective wearable-sensor study.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Step count as a digital mobility outcome in orthopedics and orthopedic trauma surgery: a scoping review.EFORT open reviews · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Enabling our patients to recover back to their pre-injury state or beyond is at the core of every treatment in orthopedic trauma surgery. Current methods of assessing functional recovery after extremity trauma largely focus on individual segments of complex, compound activities, or are created for a specific purpose and for specific populations. Such assessment instruments cannot readily account for the effect of limitations in adjacent segments. Equally, the segment-specific instruments use limited domains to assess complex actions and aptitudes. Most traditional functional assessment tools do not accommodate the individual nature of function and only assess function in larger increments during follow-up clinic visits. Recent developments of both commercial and medical-grade wearable systems and associated digital technologies can overcome most of the challenges associated with traditional outcome measures. In this review, we introduce the main technologies and their potential to track patient functional recovery in relation to the treatment phase, both before and after an injury.
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.