DIGITAL AND ROBOT-ASSISTED KINESITHERAPY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF CLINICAL EFFICACY, SAFETY, AND TRANSLATIONAL VALIDITY COMPARED TO CONVENTIONAL REHABILITATION

Authors

  • Nataša Petrevska Arsovska Faculty of Medical Sciences, Goce Delcev University, Stip, North Macedonia
  • Toše Krstev Faculty of Medical Sciences, Goce Delcev University, Stip, North Macedonia

Keywords:

kinesitherapy, digital rehabilitation, robotic therapy, telerehabilitation, virtual reality

Abstract

The digital transformation of health systems over the past two decades has driven a fundamental shift in kinesitherapy rehabilitation models, with robot-assisted systems, telerehabilitation platforms, virtual and augmented reality, wearable biosensors, and artificial intelligence algorithms creating new clinical paradigms whose efficacy, safety, and applicability in routine clinical practice require rigorous evaluation according to the principles of evidence-based medicine. The purpose of this systematic review was to conduct a critical comparative analysis of the clinical efficacy, safety, and translational validity of digital and robot-assisted rehabilitation models compared to conventional kinesitherapy, and to assess the extent to which technological innovation translates into genuine clinical superiority. Methodologically, the research was designed as a systematic review with critical comparative synthesis, aligned with internationally recognized guidelines for reporting systematic reviews, with research questions structured according to population, intervention, comparison, and outcome; the search was conducted across major biomedical and clinical literature databases for the period 2005 to 2026, including randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses, with methodological quality assessed using a standardized physiotherapy evidence rating scale, risk of bias evaluated with a revised tool for randomized trials, and certainty of evidence assessed according to a structured grading approach. Results supported by moderate-to-high quality evidence indicated that robot-assisted therapy in post-stroke patients significantly improved motor function when combined with conventional therapy, with a standardized mean difference of 0.34 to 0.50 for upper-limb motor function and increased odds of achieving independent walking; interventions based on virtual reality demonstrated statistically significant improvements in functional outcomes and patient motivation; telerehabilitation showed non-inferiority relative to standard care, with high patient satisfaction and improved accessibility; and wearable sensor systems combined with machine learning algorithms supported objective, reproducible tracking of motor recovery, although the certainty of this evidence remained lower due to moderate inconsistency and indirectness of the outcome measures used. In conclusion, digital and robot-assisted kinesitherapy demonstrated clinical efficacy and a favorable safety profile in selected populations, supported by moderate-to-high quality evidence, although the integration of these technologies into clinical practice must be guided by clearly defined research questions, methodological transparency, and standardization of outcome measures; multicenter randomized controlled trials with longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm the long-term clinical and economic sustainability of these models.

References

Aminov, A., Rogers, J. M., Middleton, S., Caeyenberghs, K., & Wilson, P. H. (2018). What do randomized controlled trials say about virtual rehabilitation in stroke? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of upper-limb and cognitive outcomes. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 15(1), 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-018-0370-2

Amirbekova, M., Kispayeva, T., Adomaviciene, A., Eszhanova, L., Bolshakova, I., & Ospanova, Z. (2025). Systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness of robotic therapy in the recovery of motor functions after stroke. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 19, 1622661. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2025.1622661

Cottrell, M. A., Galea, O. A., O'Leary, S. P., Hill, A. J., & Russell, T. G. (2017). Real-time telerehabilitation for the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions is effective and comparable to standard practice: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical Rehabilitation, 31(5), 625–638. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215516645148

Gu, B., Kim, H. S., Kim, H., & Yoo, J.-I. (2026). Advancements in wearable sensor technologies for health monitoring in terms of clinical applications, rehabilitation, and disease risk assessment: Systematic review. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 14, e76084. https://doi.org/10.2196/76084

Guyatt, G. H., Oxman, A. D., Vist, G. E., Kunz, R., Falck-Ytter, Y., Alonso-Coello, P., & Schünemann, H. J. (2008). GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, 336(7650), 924–926. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39489.470347.AD

Howard, I. M., & Kaufman, M. S. (2018). Telehealth applications for outpatients with neuromuscular or musculoskeletal disorders. Muscle & Nerve, 58(4), 475–485. https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.26115

Howick, J., Chalmers, I., Glasziou, P., Greenhalgh, T., Heneghan, C., Liberati, A., Moschetti, I., Phillips, B., Thornton, H., Goddard, O., & Hodgkinson, M. (2011). The 2011 Oxford CEBM levels of evidence (introductory document). Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine.

Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2016). Why most clinical research is not useful. PLOS Medicine, 13(6), e1002049. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002049

Kleim, J. A., & Jones, T. A. (2008). Principles of experience-dependent neural plasticity: Implications for rehabilitation after brain damage. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 51(1), S225–S239. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2008/018)

Laver, K. E., Lange, B., George, S., Deutsch, J. E., Saposnik, G., & Crotty, M. (2017). Virtual reality for stroke rehabilitation. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2017(11), CD008349. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD008349.pub4

Maher, C. G., Sherrington, C., Herbert, R. D., Moseley, A. M., & Elkins, M. (2003). Reliability of the PEDro scale for rating quality of randomized controlled trials. Physical Therapy, 83(8), 713–721. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/83.8.713

Mehrholz, J., Thomas, S., Kugler, J., Pohl, M., & Elsner, B. (2020). Electromechanical-assisted training for walking after stroke. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2020(10), CD006185. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006185.pub5

Molina-Garcia, P., Mora-Traverso, M., Prieto-Moreno, R., Díaz-Vásquez, A., Antony, B., & Ariza-Vega, P. (2024). Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of telerehabilitation for musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 67(1), 101791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2023.101791

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Patel, S., Park, H., Bonato, P., Chan, L., & Rodgers, M. (2012). A review of wearable sensors and systems with application in rehabilitation. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 9(1), 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-9-21

Richardson, W. S., Wilson, M. C., Nishikawa, J., & Hayward, R. S. (1995). The well-built clinical question: A key to evidence-based decisions. ACP Journal Club, 123(3), A12–A13.

Rossetto, F., Mestanza Mattos, F. G., Gervasoni, E., Germanotta, M., Pavan, A., Cattaneo, D., Aprile, I., & Baglio, F. (2024). Efficacy of telerehabilitation with digital and robotic tools for the continuity of care of people with chronic neurological disorders: The TELENEURO@REHAB protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Digital Health, 10. https://doi.org/10.1177/20552076241228928

Russell, T. G., Buttrum, P., Wootton, R., & Jull, G. A. (2011). Internet-based outpatient telerehabilitation for patients following total knee arthroplasty: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 93(2), 113–120. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.I.01375

Shumway-Cook, A., & Woollacott, M. H. (2017). Motor control: Translating research into clinical practice (5th ed.). Wolters Kluwer.

Sterne, J. A. C., Savović, J., Page, M. J., Elbers, R. G., Blencowe, N. S., Boutron, I., Cates, C. J., Cheng, H.-Y., Corbett, M. S., Eldridge, S. M., Emberson, J. R., Hernán, M. A., Hopewell, S., Hróbjartsson, A., Junqueira, D. R., Jüni, P., Kirkham, J. J., Lasserson, T., Li, T., … Higgins, J. P. T. (2019). RoB 2: A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ, 366, l4898. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l4898

Sumner, J., Lim, H. W., Chong, L. S., Bundele, A., Mukhopadhyay, A., & Kayambu, G. (2023). Artificial intelligence in physical rehabilitation: A systematic review. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 146, 102693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artmed.2023.102693

Topol, E. J. (2019). Deep medicine: How artificial intelligence can make healthcare human again. Basic Books.

Veerbeek, J. M., Langbroek-Amersfoort, A. C., van Wegen, E. E. H., Meskers, C. G. M., & Kwakkel, G. (2017). Effects of robot-assisted therapy for the upper limb after stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair, 31(2), 107–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968316666957

Wei, S., & Wu, Z. (2023). The application of wearable sensors and machine learning algorithms in rehabilitation training: A systematic review. Sensors, 23(18), 7667. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23187667

World Health Organization. (2021). Global strategy on digital health 2020–2025. WHO Press.

Downloads

Published

2026-10-07

How to Cite

Petrevska Arsovska, N., & Krstev, T. (2026). DIGITAL AND ROBOT-ASSISTED KINESITHERAPY: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF CLINICAL EFFICACY, SAFETY, AND TRANSLATIONAL VALIDITY COMPARED TO CONVENTIONAL REHABILITATION. KNOWLEDGE - International Journal , 78(4), 467–472. Retrieved from https://ojs.ikm.mk/index.php/kij/article/view/8619

Most read articles by the same author(s)