PTSystematic ReviewFrontiers in rehabilitation sciences2026

Posture evaluation and treatment in adolescents through wearable technology: a systematic review.

Sara Liguori, Antimo Moretti, Viviana Andreozzi and 8 others

PMID 41929565

WHAT IT FOUND

Only three studies, with 103 participants, were found.

They used different devices and outcomes, so the review cannot support any wearable posture system as effective or as a standardized approach.

Key findings

01The review included only 3 reports, with 103 participants in total.

02Only one included study reported a clearly defined primary outcome.

03The review did not combine the study results numerically because the studies differed in design, target populations, technologies, and outcomes.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

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.

Already have one?

What it does not show

Only 3 reports were included, with 103 participants total. All included studies were non-randomized, and the review states that this automatically lowers certainty. The studies differed in design, target populations, technologies, and outcomes, so the review did not combine them numerically. Small samples, absent control groups in some cases, incomplete blinding reports, confounder management not well described, vague device validation, and no long-term follow-up were recurring problems. Only one study reported a clearly defined primary outcome, and the others relied on indirect technology-derived metrics with limited clinical validation.

Declared interests

The authors declare financial support for this work from the Piano Nazionale di Ripresa e Resilienza (PNRR), Mission 4, Component 2, Investment 1, project name 2024532328.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that wearable posture devices are proven effective for adolescents. The review found only 3 very different studies, with 103 participants, and did not combine their results because they differed too much in design, technology, and outcomes.

Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →