Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The past, present, and future of remote patient monitoring in spine care: an overview

  • Review Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has revolutionized the landscape of healthcare. From humble beginnings rooted in landline home telephone calls to present-day devices with near instantaneous wireless connectivity, the evolution of technology has ushered in an era of digital medicine and remote care. Presently, a vast array of healthcare data points can be automatically generated, analyzed, and forwarded to providers to supplement clinical decision-making. While RPM originated and was popularized within medicine, its role in orthopedics, and particularly within spine surgery, is evolving. We sought to provide an overview of RPM within orthopedics, with specific attention on spine care, analyzing its origins, present-day form, and prospects.

Methods

We reviewed the literature to date as it pertains to RPM within healthcare at large, orthopedics, and spine care.

Results

We detail the development and clinical use of wearable technology and smart implants, examining the underlying technology and evaluating the spectrum of their present-day and potential applications.

Conclusions

Technological advancements are not only reshaping the paradigm of musculoskeletal care but are also redefining the physician–patient relationship as well as reimagining traditional perspectives on healthcare data collection and privacy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Dias D, Paulo Silva Cunha J (2018) Wearable health devices-vital sign monitoring. Syst Technol Sens. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18082414 (Basel)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Quinn CC, Shardell MD, Terrin ML et al (2011) Cluster-randomized trial of a mobile phone personalized behavioral intervention for blood glucose control. Diabetes Care 34:1934–1942. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc11-0366

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. McLean S, Nurmatov U, Liu JLY et al (2012) Telehealthcare for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: cochrane Review and meta-analysis. Br J Gen Pract 62:e739–e749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Nakamura N, Koga T, Iseki H (2014) A meta-analysis of remote patient monitoring for chronic heart failure patients. J Telemed Telecare 20:11–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X13517352

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Atreja A, Francis S, Kurra S, Kabra R (2019) Digital medicine and evolution of remote patient monitoring in cardiac electrophysiology: a state-of-the-art perspective. Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med 21:92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ledet EH, Liddle B, Kradinova K, Harper S (2018) Smart implants in orthopedic surgery, improving patient outcomes: a review. Innov Entrep Heal 5:41–51. https://doi.org/10.2147/ieh.s133518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Nachemson A, Elfström G (1971) Intravital wireless telemetry of axial forces in Harrington distraction rods in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 53:445–465

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Elfström G, Nachemson A (1973) Telemetry recordings of forces in the Harrington distraction rod: a method for increasing safety in the operative treatment of scoliosis patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-197306000-00016

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rydell NW (1966) Forces acting on the femoral head-prosthesis. A study on strain gauge supplied prostheses in living persons. Acta Orthop Scand 37(Suppl 88):1–132. https://doi.org/10.3109/ort.1966.37.suppl-88.01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Waugh TR (1966) Intravital measurements during instrumental correction of idiopathic scoliosis. Acta Orthop Scand 37(Suppl 93):1–87. https://doi.org/10.3109/ort.1966.37.suppl-93.01

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ramakrishna VAS, Chamoli U, Rajan G et al (2020) Smart orthopaedic implants: a targeted approach for continuous postoperative evaluation in the spine. J Biomech 104:109690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zarowin J, Warnick E, Mangan J et al (2020) Is Wearable technology part of the future of orthopedic health care? Clin spine Surg 33:99–101. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000776

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Stienen MN, Ho AL, Staartjes VE et al (2019) Objective measures of functional impairment for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine: a systematic review of the literature. Spine J 19:1276–1293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2019.02.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee TJ, Galetta MS, Nicholson KJ et al (2020) Wearable technology in spine surgery. Clin spine Surg 33:218–221. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000905

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Mobbs RJ, Phan K, Maharaj M, Rao PJ (2016) Physical activity measured with accelerometer and self-rated disability in lumbar spine surgery: a prospective study. Glob spine J 6:459–464. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1565259

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Scheer JK, Bakhsheshian J, Keefe MK et al (2017) Initial experience with real-time continuous physical activity monitoring in patients undergoing spine surgery. Clin spine Surg 30:E1434–E1443. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000521

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Stienen MN, Rezaii PG, Ho AL et al (2020) Objective activity tracking in spine surgery: a prospective feasibility study with a low-cost consumer grade wearable accelerometer. Sci Rep 10:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-61893-4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Chakravorty A, Mobbs RJ, Anderson DB et al (2019) The role of wearable devices and objective gait analysis for the assessment and monitoring of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis: systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 20:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lee SI, Campion A, Huang A et al (2017) Identifying predictors for postoperative clinical outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis patients using smart-shoe technology. J Neuroeng Rehabil 14:77. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-017-0288-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Conway J, Tomkins CC, Haig AJ (2011) Walking assessment in people with lumbar spinal stenosis: capacity, performance, and self-report measures. Spine J 11:816–823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2010.10.019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Smuck M, Muaremi A, Zheng P et al (2018) Objective measurement of function following lumbar spinal stenosis decompression reveals improved functional capacity with stagnant real-life physical activity. Spine J 18:15–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2017.08.262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Simpson L, Maharaj MM, Mobbs RJ (2019) The role of wearables in spinal posture analysis: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 20:55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Wang Y, Zhou H, Yang Z et al (2018) An intelligent wearable device for human’s cervical vertebra posture monitoring. In: Conf Proc. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc Annu Conf 2018, pp 3280–3283. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2018.8512896

  24. Bazzarelli M, Durdle N, Lou E et al (2002) A wearable networked embedded system for the treatment of scoliosis. Stud Health Technol Inform 91:383–386

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lou E, Lam GC, Hill DL, Wong MS (2012) Development of a smart garment to reduce kyphosis during daily living. Med Biol Eng Comput 50:1147–1154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-011-0847-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Felisberto F, Fdez-Riverola F, Pereira A (2014) A ubiquitous and low-cost solution for movement monitoring and accident detection based on sensor fusion. Sensors 14:8961–8983. https://doi.org/10.3390/s140508961 (Basel)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Pang I, Okubo Y, Sturnieks D et al (2019) Detection of near falls using wearable devices: a systematic review. J Geriatr Phys Ther 42:48–56. https://doi.org/10.1519/JPT.0000000000000181

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Watch—Apple. https://www.apple.com/watch/. Accessed 17 Feb 2021

  29. Fitbit Official Site for Activity Trackers & More. https://www.fitbit.com/global/us/home. Accessed 17 Feb 2021

  30. Kang S-W, Choi H, Park H-I et al (2017) The development of an IMU integrated clothes for postural monitoring using conductive yarn and interconnecting technology. Sensors. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17112560 (Basel)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Voinea GD, Butnariu S, Mogan G (2017) Measurement and geometric modelling of human spine posture for medical rehabilitation purposes using a wearable monitoring system based on inertial sensors. Sensors. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17010003 (Switzerland)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Yamamoto A, Nakamoto H, Yamaji T et al (2017) Method for measuring tri-axial lumbar motion angles using wearable sheet stretch sensors. PLoS ONE 12:e0183651. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183651

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Yoong NKM, Perring J, Mobbs RJ (2019) Commercial postural devices: a review. Sensors. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19235128 (Basel)

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Kairy D, Lehoux P, Vincent C, Visintin M (2009) A systematic review of clinical outcomes, clinical process, healthcare utilization and costs associated with telerehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 31:427–447. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280802062553

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang Q, Chen W, Timmermans AAA, et al (2015) Smart rehabilitation garment for posture monitoring. In: Conf Proc. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc Annu Conf 2015, pp 5736–5739. https://doi.org/10.1109/EMBC.2015.7319695

  36. Brogioli M, Schneider S, Popp WL et al (2016) Monitoring upper limb recovery after cervical spinal cord injury: insights beyond assessment scores. Front Neurol 7:142. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2016.00142

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Rohlmann A, Bergmann G, Graichen F (1994) A spinal fixation device for in vivo load measurement. J Biomech 27:961–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(94)90268-2

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Graichen F, Bergmann G, Rohlmann A (1996) Patient monitoring system for load measurement with spinal fixation devices. Med Eng Phys 18:167–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/1350-4533(95)00030-5

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhao J, Ghannam R, Htet KO et al (2020) Self-powered implantable medical devices: photovoltaic energy harvesting review. Adv Healthc Mater 9:e2000779. https://doi.org/10.1002/adhm.202000779

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Soares dos Santos MP, Ferreira JAF, Ramos A et al (2013) Instrumented hip implants: electric supply systems. J Biomech 46:2561–2571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.08.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Liu X, Bennett MM (2020) Viral borders: COVID-19’s effects on securitization, surveillance, and identity in Mainland China and Hong Kong. Dialog Hum Geogr 10:158–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Pascalev A (2018) 2567 OHRP meets ToS: cloud-based technologies in human subject research. J Clin Transl Sci 2:85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Products liability | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/products_liability. Accessed 20 Feb 2021

  44. Gross MS, Miller RC, Pascalev A (2020) Ethical implementation of wearables in pandemic response: a call for a paradigm shift. https://ethics.harvard.edu/ethical-wearables. Accessed 18 Feb 2021

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Harry M. Lightsey IV, Caleb M. Yeung & Melvin C. Makhni

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush Medical College, Chicago, IL, USA

    Dino Samartzis

Authors
  1. Harry M. Lightsey IV
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Caleb M. Yeung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dino Samartzis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Melvin C. Makhni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Melvin C. Makhni.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript report no conflicts of interest that are directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lightsey, H.M., Yeung, C.M., Samartzis, D. et al. The past, present, and future of remote patient monitoring in spine care: an overview. Eur Spine J 30, 2102–2108 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-021-06921-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-021-06921-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation