Leonard Lisitano, Zarek Hezrrai DaSilva, Nicholas Koch, Willie Dong, Tyler Thorne, Timon Röttinger, Daniel Pfeufer, Justin Haller
{"title":"The Impact of Real-Time Biofeedback on Partial Weightbearing Training: A Comparative Study.","authors":"Leonard Lisitano, Zarek Hezrrai DaSilva, Nicholas Koch, Willie Dong, Tyler Thorne, Timon Röttinger, Daniel Pfeufer, Justin Haller","doi":"10.26603/001c.129259","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Partial Weight Bearing (PWB) is integral to rehabilitation protocols following orthopedic and trauma surgeries. Standard of Care (SOC) for PWB training often involves using a bathroom scale, a method criticized for its inaccuracy. This study aimed to compare SOC training in PWB with a biofeedback device (insole).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Sixty healthy participants were randomized into SOC or Biofeedback (BF) training groups, practicing 20 kg PWB using a standardized protocol. Gait data, including compliance with weightbearing restrictions (not exceeding 150% of the set weightbearing limit), was monitored using Loadsol® insole force sensors. Participant satisfaction and usability were assessed through questionnaires. Training duration and walking speed were also measured.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The BF group's peak force averaged 330 Newtons, significantly lower than the SOC group's 600 Newtons, which exceeded the prescribed limit by over three times (p ≤ 0.001). Compliance with weightbearing restrictions was substantially higher in the BF group (88% or 29/33 participants) compared to the SOC group (19% or 5/27 participants) (p ≤ 0.001). The BF group also required less training time to learn PWB, averaging 9:00 ± 3:06 minutes, versus 12:49 ± 3:01 minutes in the SOC group (p ≤ 0.001). Questionnaire responses showed no significant differences between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Real-time audio-visual Biofeedback significantly enhances compliance with weightbearing restrictions in PWB training while reducing the training duration. Based on these findings, the implementation of biofeedback devices in PWB training is recommended.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>3.</p>","PeriodicalId":47892,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy","volume":"20 3","pages":"364-372"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11872552/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26603/001c.129259","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SPORT SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Partial Weight Bearing (PWB) is integral to rehabilitation protocols following orthopedic and trauma surgeries. Standard of Care (SOC) for PWB training often involves using a bathroom scale, a method criticized for its inaccuracy. This study aimed to compare SOC training in PWB with a biofeedback device (insole).
Methods: Sixty healthy participants were randomized into SOC or Biofeedback (BF) training groups, practicing 20 kg PWB using a standardized protocol. Gait data, including compliance with weightbearing restrictions (not exceeding 150% of the set weightbearing limit), was monitored using Loadsol® insole force sensors. Participant satisfaction and usability were assessed through questionnaires. Training duration and walking speed were also measured.
Results: The BF group's peak force averaged 330 Newtons, significantly lower than the SOC group's 600 Newtons, which exceeded the prescribed limit by over three times (p ≤ 0.001). Compliance with weightbearing restrictions was substantially higher in the BF group (88% or 29/33 participants) compared to the SOC group (19% or 5/27 participants) (p ≤ 0.001). The BF group also required less training time to learn PWB, averaging 9:00 ± 3:06 minutes, versus 12:49 ± 3:01 minutes in the SOC group (p ≤ 0.001). Questionnaire responses showed no significant differences between groups.
Conclusion: Real-time audio-visual Biofeedback significantly enhances compliance with weightbearing restrictions in PWB training while reducing the training duration. Based on these findings, the implementation of biofeedback devices in PWB training is recommended.