Electrically assisted bicycles in adults: a scoping review of health outcomes and relevance to rehabilitation.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 REHABILITATION
João Pedro de Santana Silva, Adriele de Morais Nunes, Ricardo Rodrigues da Silva, Renato Max Faria, Saint-Clair Gomes Bernardes Neto, Íllia Nadinne Dantas Florentino Lima
{"title":"Electrically assisted bicycles in adults: a scoping review of health outcomes and relevance to rehabilitation.","authors":"João Pedro de Santana Silva, Adriele de Morais Nunes, Ricardo Rodrigues da Silva, Renato Max Faria, Saint-Clair Gomes Bernardes Neto, Íllia Nadinne Dantas Florentino Lima","doi":"10.1186/s13102-026-01904-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Electrically assisted bicycles (e-bikes) have gained attention as a low-barrier strategy for promoting physical activity among individuals with different levels of exercise tolerance. Although most research has been conducted in community and active-transport settings, some outcomes may be relevant to rehabilitation. This scoping review mapped e-bikes among adults and synthesized health outcomes with potential relevance to rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Following JBI methodology and PRISMA-ScR reporting guidance, we searched major health databases and supplementary sources from inception to 25 September 2025. We included experimental and observational studies involving adults aged ≥ 18 years who used pedal-assist e-bikes. No restriction was imposed on intervention or exposure duration. Two reviewers independently screened the records, extracted the data, and assessed methodological quality using the Effective Public Health Practice Project tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 8,242 records identified, 14 studies were included. Most involved healthy adults and were conducted in Europe, with few studies including clinical populations. E-bike protocols varied widely, but several elicited moderate-intensity physiological responses and were associated with greater cycling participation and lower perceived exertion. Evidence on metabolic, cognitive, and psychological outcomes was limited. All included studies received an overall weak methodological quality rating. Study duration ranged from single-session assessments to nine-month interventions, while one community program operated for approximately 21 months.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>E-bikes may offer a feasible, low-barrier means of promoting physical activity and cycling participation while reducing perceived exertion. However, the evidence remains exploratory because most studies involved small samples and healthy participants, and few were conducted in clinical rehabilitation settings. Further controlled trials are needed before e-bikes can be routinely recommended for rehabilitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":48585,"journal":{"name":"BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13102-026-01904-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Electrically assisted bicycles (e-bikes) have gained attention as a low-barrier strategy for promoting physical activity among individuals with different levels of exercise tolerance. Although most research has been conducted in community and active-transport settings, some outcomes may be relevant to rehabilitation. This scoping review mapped e-bikes among adults and synthesized health outcomes with potential relevance to rehabilitation.

Methods: Following JBI methodology and PRISMA-ScR reporting guidance, we searched major health databases and supplementary sources from inception to 25 September 2025. We included experimental and observational studies involving adults aged ≥ 18 years who used pedal-assist e-bikes. No restriction was imposed on intervention or exposure duration. Two reviewers independently screened the records, extracted the data, and assessed methodological quality using the Effective Public Health Practice Project tool.

Results: Of 8,242 records identified, 14 studies were included. Most involved healthy adults and were conducted in Europe, with few studies including clinical populations. E-bike protocols varied widely, but several elicited moderate-intensity physiological responses and were associated with greater cycling participation and lower perceived exertion. Evidence on metabolic, cognitive, and psychological outcomes was limited. All included studies received an overall weak methodological quality rating. Study duration ranged from single-session assessments to nine-month interventions, while one community program operated for approximately 21 months.

Conclusions: E-bikes may offer a feasible, low-barrier means of promoting physical activity and cycling participation while reducing perceived exertion. However, the evidence remains exploratory because most studies involved small samples and healthy participants, and few were conducted in clinical rehabilitation settings. Further controlled trials are needed before e-bikes can be routinely recommended for rehabilitation.

成人电动自行车:健康结果的范围审查及其与康复的相关性。
背景:电动自行车(e-bikes)作为一种低障碍策略,在不同运动耐受性水平的人群中促进身体活动,已经引起了人们的关注。虽然大多数研究是在社区和主动交通环境中进行的,但有些结果可能与康复有关。这一范围综述绘制了成人中使用电动自行车的情况,并综合了与康复潜在相关的健康结果。方法:遵循JBI方法学和PRISMA-ScR报告指南,检索了从成立到2025年9月25日的主要卫生数据库和补充来源。我们纳入了使用踏板辅助电动自行车的年龄≥18岁的成年人的实验和观察性研究。对干预或暴露时间没有限制。两名审稿人独立筛选记录,提取数据,并使用有效公共卫生实践项目工具评估方法学质量。结果:在确定的8242份记录中,纳入了14项研究。大多数研究涉及健康成年人,在欧洲进行,很少有包括临床人群的研究。电动自行车方案差异很大,但有几种引发了中等强度的生理反应,并与更多的骑行参与和更低的感知劳累相关。有关代谢、认知和心理结果的证据有限。所有纳入的研究都获得了总体上较弱的方法学质量评级。研究持续时间从单次评估到9个月的干预,而一个社区项目运行了大约21个月。结论:电动自行车可以提供一种可行的、低障碍的方式,促进身体活动和自行车参与,同时减少感知劳累。然而,证据仍然是探索性的,因为大多数研究涉及小样本和健康参与者,很少在临床康复环境中进行。在将电动自行车常规推荐用于康复治疗之前,还需要进一步的对照试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation
BMC Sports Science Medicine and Rehabilitation Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
5.30%
发文量
196
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Sports Science, Medicine and Rehabilitation is an open access, peer reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of sports medicine and the exercise sciences, including rehabilitation, traumatology, cardiology, physiology, and nutrition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书