Adaptability of Assistive Mobility Devices and the Role of the Internet of Medical Things: Comprehensive Review.
Daniel Ayo Oladele, Elisha Didam Markus, Adnan M Abu-Mahfouz
PMID 34779786WHAT IT FOUND
Most smart mobility aids remain prototypes tested on healthy people or in simulations, not real patients.
Therapists should not assume these devices are ready for clinical use, as training times are long, cognitive load is high, and real-world safety is unproven.
Key findings
01Many assistive mobility frameworks and devices have only been tested in simulations or on healthy subjects, not in real-world clinical scenarios with impaired users.
02Long training times and high cognitive load are significant barriers to adoption, with some devices requiring up to 20 hours of training or weeks for calibration.
03Internet of Medical Things (IoMT) frameworks for remote control and monitoring face unresolved issues with packet loss, security, and scalability that have not been evaluated in real-world use.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
This is a narrative review, not a systematic review with meta-analysis, so it does not provide pooled effect sizes or statistical certainty on efficacy. The review includes many studies that were simulations or laboratory tests on healthy subjects, which limits the generalizability of the findings to patients with actual disabilities. The field of assistive technology changes rapidly, so some included studies may not reflect the very latest hardware or software iterations available in 2021. The review focuses on the technical and usability aspects of devices rather than clinical outcomes, so it cannot tell you if these devices improve health or functional independence.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the existence of these smart devices as evidence that they are clinically effective or safe for your patients. Most were tested in simulations or on healthy volunteers, and the review explicitly states that real-world testing and performance evaluation are lacking. Assuming a device is ready for use because it has IoT connectivity or AI navigation is incorrect.