Continuous Movement Monitoring at Home Through Wearable Devices: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Background: Wearable sensors are a promising tool for the remote, continuous monitoring of motor symptoms and physical activity, especially in individuals with neurological or chronic conditions. Despite many experimental trials, clinical adoption remains limited. A major barrier is the lack of awareness and confidence among healthcare professionals in these technologies.

Methods: This systematic review analyzed the use of wearable sensors for continuous motor monitoring at home, focusing on their purpose, type, feasibility, and effectiveness in neurological, musculoskeletal, or rheumatologic conditions. This review followed PRISMA guidelines and included studies from PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science.

Results: Seventy-two studies with 7949 participants met inclusion criteria. Neurological disorders, particularly Parkinson's disease, were the most frequently studied. Common sensors included inertial measurement units (IMUs), accelerometers, and gyroscopes, often integrated into medical devices, smartwatches, or smartphones. Monitoring periods ranged from 24 h to over two years. Feasibility studies showed high patient compliance (≥70%) and good acceptance, with strong agreement with clinical assessments. However, only half of the studies were controlled trials, and just 5.6% were randomized.

Conclusions: Wearable sensors offer strong potential for real-world motor function monitoring. Yet, challenges persist, including ethical issues, data privacy, standardization, and healthcare access. Artificial intelligence integration may boost predictive accuracy and personalized care.

Keywords: digital health; home-based monitoring; inertial measurement units (IMUs); motor symptoms; remote assessment; wearable sensors.

Figure 1

Flowchart of screening procedure according to PRISMA guidelines.

Figure 2

Information about the number of sensors applied to the patients, the parameters analyzed (quantity of movement (QM), fall event/risk (FE), turning events (TEs), gait parameters (GPs), motor symptoms (MSs), clinician-assessed or self-reported scales/indexes (SC), other (OT)), and the number of studies involved in this matching. Legend: green circle = studies involved; size of the circle = proportional to the number of the studies involved.

Figure 3

Targets (quantity of movement (QM), fall event/risk (FE), turning events (TEs), gait parameters (GPs), motor symptoms (MSs), clinician-assessed or self-reported scales/indexes (SC), other (OT)) analyzed in the different health conditions and how much this matching is represented in this review. Legend: green circle = articles describing the related pathological condition; size of the circle = proportional to the number of the articles involved.