ArticleScientific reports2025
Breaking down costs: rehabilitation robotics vs. usual care therapy in diverse healthcare models.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Implementing Rehabilitation Robotics in Routine Care: A Mapping Review of Service Delivery Models, Implementation Determinants, Strategies, and Real-World Outcomes.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
One of the significant barriers to the adoption of rehabilitation robotics into clinical care over the last 30 years has been the high investment costs of the technology. There have been limited efforts to understand the healthcare economics of implementing rehabilitation robotics compared to usual care. From the few studies that have investigated the cost, the findings have had limited generalizability to other clinical settings or contexts due to diverse healthcare models and the complexity of implementation factors. This study compares three organizational models in rehabilitation centers across the USA, UK, and Italy. We developed a common formula to compute cost differences between robotics and usual care for the upper limb and conducted a deterministic sensitivity analysis to identify key cost-influencing parameters. Results indicate that models where a single therapist supervises multiple patients can lead to significant economic savings: the Veteran Affairs in the US could achieve 18% savings with full utilization of robotic treatment slots (4300 h/year) and Italy's Fondazione don Gnocchi rehabilitation model could realize 30% savings (6187 h/year). Conversely, the organizational model adopted by the RATULS study in UK generates 105% additional costs with 1820 h/year of robotics usage, mainly due to the 1:1 therapist-patient ratio adopted.
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.