Use of Assistive Technology for Persons with Psychosocial Disability: Systematic Review.
Ikenna D Ebuenyi, Celina Flocks-Monaghan, Sarju S Rai and 4 others
PMID 37966875WHAT IT FOUND
Evidence for user-controlled devices in psychosocial disability rests on five studies, one a single case.
PDAs, phone alarms, pill-cap monitors and weighted blankets were each reported to help with social function, daily tasks, medication adherence and sleep.
Key findings
01Only five studies met the inclusion criteria, published between 2008 and 2021, and the authors describe them as too different in design, country, device and population to combine, so they wrote a narrative summary instead.
02Different devices were each reported to help: phone alarms giving spoken prompts increased the number of daily activity steps performed correctly, a pill-cap monitor improved medication adherence, and depression and anxiety symptoms fell significantly in the participants allocated the weighted blanket.
03No included study came from a low- or middle-income country, and the review notes that only about 10% of people who need assistive technology have access to it, an estimate the authors say is drawn more from physical than psychosocial disability.
04Because the review restricted itself to hardware people can use without a provider, it says nothing about the smartphone apps and service-run digital tools the authors describe as the usual digital option.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat 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
Only five studies were included, and they were too different to combine, so the review can describe what each one reported but cannot say whether any device works. One of the five is about a single patient, which is not evidence that a treatment works. The review deliberately left out apps, phone-based programmes and other tools run by a service, which the authors say are the usual digital option, so it says nothing about those. All five studies came from high-income countries and only English-language studies were included, so nothing here speaks to low- and middle-income settings. Several of the reported benefits, including better recognition of unhelpful thoughts, more confidence in expressing them, and fewer symptoms of guilt and depression, come from the single-patient case report rather than from a group study. The review does not report how many people took part in total across the five studies.
Declared interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The supplied text does not say who funded the review.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that these devices work for people with psychosocial disability. The review found only five studies and could not combine them, and some of the reported benefits, including better recognition of unhelpful thoughts, more confidence and fewer symptoms of guilt and depression, come from a single patient's case report.
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 →