Supportive mobility devices across the lifespan in Cerebral Palsy: a modified Delphi study to establish stakeholder research priorities.
Heather A Feldner, Deborah Gaebler-Spira, Varun Awasthi and 1 others
PMID 37452575WHAT IT FOUND
Nine US stakeholders with cerebral palsy, families, and clinicians ranked research priorities for mobility devices.
They prioritized trial equipment access, provider training, and shared decision-making. These themes guide future study design, not current clinical practice.
Key findings
01Stakeholders prioritized research into trial equipment access, provider training, and shared decision-making for mobility devices.
02The advisory panel consisted of nine individuals: three adults with cerebral palsy, two parents, and four providers.
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 panel was very small (n=9) and drawn from the United States, limiting generalizability. The sample lacked racial and ethnic diversity, with no Black, Indigenous, or Latino participants. Two adults with cerebral palsy were also physicians, potentially skewing perspectives toward medical expertise rather than typical lived experience. The study establishes research priorities, not clinical efficacy or best practices.
Declared interests
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret these findings as evidence that specific mobility devices or interventions improve patient outcomes. This is a consensus study on what topics should be researched next, not a trial of what works clinically.