Integrating Technology Into Clinical Practice for the Assessment of Balance and Mobility: Perspectives of Exercise Professionals Practicing in Retirement and Long-term Care.
Karen Van Ooteghem, Avril Mansfield, Elizabeth L Inness and 2 others
PMID 33543070WHAT IT FOUND
Exercise professionals in retirement and long-term care view technology-assisted balance assessment as a useful adjunct, not a replacement.
They prioritize tools that allow modular task selection to accommodate residents with cognitive or physical limitations, and value objective data for tracking progress and communicating with families.
Key findings
01Participants viewed technology as complementary to traditional assessment, citing benefits in objective data for programming, communication, and electronic storage, but noted the need for workflow integration.
02Key barriers included the heterogeneity of resident abilities and lack of appropriate normative data, particularly for those with cognitive impairment who may not follow instructions.
03Solutions proposed by clinicians included modular, 'plug and play' technology that allows selection of relevant tasks (e.g., seated balance, transfers) rather than a fixed full assessment.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
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
The study focused on exercise professionals' perspectives, not patient outcomes or actual implementation success. Participants were relatively young (mean age 31), which may have influenced their technical literacy and positive attitude toward technology. Focus groups were conducted with colleagues and a coordinator present, which may have influenced willingness to express negative views. The study did not compare traditional assessments with technology-derived measures directly.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was conducted within a private residential care organization, and participants were employees of that organization.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret this as evidence that technology improves patient outcomes or is ready for immediate widespread adoption. The findings reflect clinician perceptions and preferences for tool design, not validated efficacy or feasibility in real-world clinical trials.