| Summary: | Introduction: Sensory Substitution is a biofeedback intervention whereby at least sensory system is utilised to supplement environmental information which is traditionally gathered by another sense. Objective: To present an evidence-based overview of the feasibility and effectiveness of wearable Sensory Substitution devices on gait outcomes in orthopaedic patient populations. Methods: This Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis was reported according to the PRISMA 2020 statement. PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of science and PEDro were searched for relevant published literature. Inclusion criteria limited the search strictly to patients diagnosed with an orthopaedic condition and who were randomly grouped to a Sensory Substitution intervention or conventional therapy/training or an equivalent placebo intervention. Results: Nine Randomised Controlled Trials and three Crossover Trials investigating the effectiveness of Sensory Substitution supplemented gait training were identified and included participants with a variety of orthopaedic conditions. Meta-Analyses revealed positive findings of feasibility as well as statistical and clinical effect of the interventions in improving measures of gait speed, weight-bearing control, measures of functionality and subjective self-reporting. Meta-Analyses also revealed the interventions effects were not significant in the management of pain and retention of gait speed. Negatively reinforced Sensory Substitution biofeedback was statistically and clinically effective, whilst positively reinforced biofeedback was not. Conclusion: For orthopaedic patient populations to improve gait speed, weight-bearing control, functionality, pain and self-report measures, the authors recommend a Sensory Substitution supplemented gait training programme with negative biofeedback on performance. The intervention should be undertaken for 20 min per day, 3 days per week for 5 weeks. The intervention should coincide with structured analgesia administration to facilitate effective pain management. Limitations of the data included some low sample sizes and large age-ranges. No financial support was provided for this study.
|
|---|