Bridging the gaps: how emerging technologies are shaping the future of physiotherapy for all
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20262310Keywords:
Emerging technologies, Physiotherapy, Public health, Telerehabilitation, Digital health equity, Artificial intelligence in rehabilitationAbstract
Physiotherapy has traditionally been delivered face‑to‑face in clinical settings, but emerging technologies like telerehabilitation, wearable sensors, virtual/augmented reality, robotic exoskeletons, and artificial intelligence (AI) are rapidly changing this model. This narrative review of 42 peer‑reviewed, open‑access articles published between 2018 and 2026 examines their implications for equitable health service delivery. Results show that telerehabilitation is as effective as in‑person care for many conditions, with high patient satisfaction and rare adverse events. Wearable devices enable continuous home monitoring and improve physical activity, while virtual reality increases engagement and motor outcomes in stroke, ageing, and musculoskeletal conditions. Robotic exoskeletons improve walking and upper‑limb function in spinal cord injury and stroke, though costs remain high. AI enhances personalisation and prediction, but data are mostly from small studies. From a public health perspective, these technologies offer opportunities to improve access, reduce costs, and address inequalities in rehabilitation care. However, major barriers include the digital divide, lack of equity reporting, and limited implementation in low‑resource settings. Without deliberate attention to digital determinants of health, these innovations risk widening existing inequalities. Therefore, emerging technologies can transform physiotherapy into a more accessible, continuous, and person‑centred model of care, but future implementation must prioritise affordability, digital literacy, and integration into public health systems.
References
Cieza A, Causey K, Kamenov K, Hanson SW, Chatterji S, Vos T. Global estimates of the need for rehabilitation based on the Global Burden of Disease study 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet. 2021;396(10267):2006-17.
World Health Organization. Global report on health equity for persons with disabilities. Geneva: WHO; 2022. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240063600. Accessed on 10 April 2026.
Muula T, Talberg H, Burgess T. The use of telerehabilitation in physiotherapy in lower middle income countries: a scoping review. Cape Town: University of Cape Town OpenUCT; 2025. Available at: https://srvubudsp001.uct.ac.za/items/9cd22c4c-461b-4eaa-90ef-c7c30ae348a0. Accessed on 10 April 2026.
Louw Q, Derman W, van Niekerk SM. A situational analysis of rehabilitation services in sub Saharan Africa. Afr J Disabil. 2024;13:1234.
Alwhaibi R, Alqahtani AS, Alkhathami K. Telerehabilitation and its impact following stroke: an umbrella review of systematic reviews. J Clin Med. 2025;14(1):50.
Cuesta Vargas AI, Pérez Cruzado D, González Sánchez M, Merchán Baeza JA. Telerehabilitation as a therapeutic exercise tool versus face to face physiotherapy: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023;20(5):4358.
Aburub A, Alhajjaj F, Alawneh A. The promise of telehealth in cardiac physiotherapy for rural and underserved populations: a systematic review. Telemed J E Health. 2025;31(4):e1120-32.
Sivertsson J, Sernert N, Åhlund K. Exercise based telerehabilitation in chronic low back pain-a scoping review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024;25:948.
Shnitzer H, Chan J, Yau T, McIntyre M, Andreoli A, Kua A, et al. The safety of telerehabilitation: systematic review. JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol. 2025;12:e68681.
Stockley RC, Hirst Y, Hayes C, Watkins KE, Goodwin PC. How equitable is digital rehabilitation for people after stroke? A systematic review using an equity approach. Front Digit Health. 2025;7:1544754.
Veras M, Sigouin J, Auger C, Claudine A, Sara A, Zachary B, et al. A rapid review of ethical and equity dimensions in telerehabilitation for physiotherapy and occupational therapy. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025;22(7):1091.
Latif A, Zafar S, Khan AA, Gianpaolo F, Leila S, Ara D, et al. Use of commercially available wearable devices for physical rehabilitation in healthcare: a systematic review. BMJ Open. 2024;14(11):e084086.
Lorke M, Stefanou T. Improving research and development of wearable assistive and rehabilitation technologies: a systematic review on diversity factors. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2025;22(1):31.
Smart wearable technologies for balance rehabilitation in older adults at risk of falls: scoping review and comparative analysis. Smart Health. 2025;35:100512.
Felsberg DT, Pousti R, Howard CK, Ross SE, Raisbeck LD, McGuirt JT, Rhea CK. The landscape of virtual reality use in mobility rehabilitation from 2010 2023: a scoping review. Technologies. 2025;13(5):167.
Shaikh HJ, Sridaran R, Dabral S, Nitika J, Mahale MR, Tanigaiselvane DJ, et al. Immersive vs. non immersive virtual reality in upper limb rehabilitation post stroke: a systematic review. J Carcinog. 2025;24(8s):983-91.
Henríquez Jurado JM, Osuna-Pérez MC, García-López H, Lomas-Vega R, Carmen López-Ruiz MD, Obrero-Gaitán E, et al. Virtual reality based therapy for chronic low back and neck pain: a systematic review with meta analysis. EFORT Open Rev. 2024;9(7):601-12.
Wojtowicz Z, Czech K, Lechowska A, Paprocka J. The impact of virtual reality based physiotherapy on upper limb function in children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review. Children. 2024;11(8):912.
Tang P, Cao Y, Vithran Vithran DTA, Xiao W, Wen T, Liu S. The efficacy of virtual reality on the rehabilitation of musculoskeletal diseases: umbrella review. J Med Internet Res. 2025;27:e64576.
Lee SH, Ko MJ, Young-Seok L, Byung-Jou L, Subum L, Woo-Keun K, et al. State of the art in robotic rehabilitation for spinal cord injury patients: a literature review. Korean J Neurotrauma. 2025;21(4):278-92.
Carnevale A, Longo UG, Schena E, Alberto L, di Luzio FS, D'Hooghe P, et al. Portable exoskeletons for upper limb rehabilitation: a systematic review. J Exp Orthop. 2025;12(3):e70416.
Robotics in physical rehabilitation: systematic review. Healthcare. 2024;12(17):1720.
Nogales A, García Tejedor ÁJ, García Tejedor I. A systematic review of the application of deep learning techniques in the physiotherapeutic therapy of musculoskeletal pathologies. Comput Biol Med. 2024;172:108082.
Kapil D, Wang J, Olawade DB, Vanderbloemen L. AI assisted physiotherapy for patients with non specific low back pain: a systematic review and meta analysis. Appl Sci. 2025;15(3):1532.
Morone G, Carbonetti R, Martino Cinnera A, Calogero M, Alessio B, Francesco N, et al. Artificial intelligence in rehabilitation: a living systematic mapping review-first release. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2025;61(5):694-708.
Dhumale A, Shinde S, Ambali MP, Patil P. Integration of artificial intelligence for diagnostic methods in musculoskeletal conditions: a systematic review. Cureus. 2025;17(2):e79391.
Opoku EN, Paul L, Antwi D, Katie T, Shadrack OA, Brady MC, et al. Effectiveness of telerehabilitation for adults with neurological conditions in low and middle income countries: a systematic review. PLOS Digit Health. 2025;4(7):e0000911.
Kelly E, Tingey J, Ott J, Hahn H, Bentley J, Wegener S, et al. Features of telerehabilitation and considerations for resource limited settings: a scoping review. Disabil CBR Incl Dev. 2024;35(1):6-33.
Padmavathi J, Gandhi S, Kumar TS. Systematic review on end users‘ perception of facilitators and barriers in accessing tele rehabilitation services. J Psychosoc Rehabil Ment Health. 2023;10(4):389-401.
Narayan SM, Calero MJ, Fuster V, Luisa CCB, Leslie LD, David D, et al. Access to digital health technologies: personalised framework and global perspectives. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2025;22(3):185-99.
Kruk ME, Gage AD, Arsenault C, Keely J, Hannah HL, Roder-DeWan S, et al. High quality health systems in the Sustainable Development Goals era: time for a revolution. Lancet Glob Health. 2018;6(11):e1196-252.
World Health Organization. Global strategy on digital health 2020 2025. Geneva: WHO; 2021. Available at: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/documents/gs4dhdaa2a9f352b0445bafbc79ca799dce4d.pdf. Accessed 10 April 2026.
Lee S, Kim J, Kim J. Substantiating clinical effectiveness and potential barriers to the widespread implementation of spinal cord injury telerehabilitation: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis of randomized trials in the recent past decade. Telemed Rep. 2021;2(1):64-77.
Bartoli D, Petrizzo A, Vellone E, Alvaro R, Pucciarelli G. Impact of telehealth on stroke survivor–caregiver dyad in at home rehabilitation: a systematic review. J Adv Nurs. 2024;80(11):4389-402.
Zhang B, Li D, Liu Y, Wang J, Xiao W. Virtual reality for motor recovery after stroke: a systematic review and meta analysis. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 2023;20:120.
Ravi DK, Kumar N, Singhi P. Effectiveness of virtual reality rehabilitation in children with cerebral palsy: a systematic review and meta analysis. Dev Neurorehabil. 2024;27(3):125-8.
de Seta V, Romeni S. Multimodal closed loop strategies for gait recovery after spinal cord injury and stroke via the integration of robotics and neuromodulation. Front Neurosci. 2025;19:1425678.
Lo K, Stephenson M, Lockwood C. Cost effectiveness of robotic exoskeletons for gait rehabilitation: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2024;19(6):2108-2120.
Olawade DB, Oladapo OJ, Egbon E. Digital health transformation in physiotherapy: a narrative review. J Med Internet Res. 2024;26:e51234.
Simpson D, Maric F, Bialocerkowski A. Preparing the next generation of physiotherapists for AI integrated practice: a curriculum review. Physiother Theory Pract. 2024;40(7):1456-68.
Meskó B, Győrffy Z. The rise of digital health technologies in physiotherapy: a bibliometric analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023;23:1155.
Turolla A, Rossettini G, Viceconti A. Artificial intelligence in physiotherapy: a scoping review of current applications and future directions. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2024;60(4):689-702.