Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Background: Neurorehabilitation plays a key role in improving motor recovery for people with neurological conditions. Although 3D printing has emerged as a promising rehabilitation tool, little is known on how it is used for the rehabilitation of adults living with neurological conditions worldwide. Objective: We aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of 3D printing in neurorehabilitation and precisely explore how it is used to improve motor recovery for adults with neurological conditions living in higher- and lower-middle-income countries. Methods: We conducted a scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. After searching 3 databases (MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Nursing and Allied Health Premium), 2 independent reviewers screened and selected English-language studies involving adults (≥18 years) published between 2019 and 2024 to capture the most recent advancements in this field. We extracted relevant information on neurological conditions, motor recovery outcomes, and types of 3D printing and offered a comparative analysis of 3D printing in physical neurorehabilitation from the perspective of national income levels using a modified Joanna Briggs Institute extraction form. We synthesized the findings narratively with tabular support. Results: After screening 2752 titles and abstracts and 103 (3.7%) full texts, we included 13 (0.5%) studies based on our inclusion criteria. All included studies were conducted in upper-middle-income or high-income countries, and most studies (9/13, 69.2%) focused on stroke, followed by spinal cord injury (2/13, 15.4%), Parkinson disease (1/13, 7.7%), and central nerve disease (1/13, 7.7%). The 3D-printed rehabilitation tools included orthotics (7/13, 53.8% for the upper extremities UEs; 3/13, 23.1% for the lower extremities LEs), an exoskeleton (1/13, 7.7%; UEs), a modular assistive hand device (1/13, 7.7%; UEs), and an insole (1/13, 7.7%; LEs). In total, 69.2% (9/13) of the studies targeted UE rehabilitation, measured using the Action Research Arm Test, active range of motion, the box and block test, the Fugl-Meyer Assessment, the Modified Ashworth Scale, the manual function test, range of motion, and the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute Hand Function Test, and 30.8% (4/13) targeted LE rehabilitation, measured using the 10-m walk test, anteroposterior ground reaction force analysis, the Barthel index, the Tinetti scale, the RehaWatch system, and the GaitWatch system. Conclusions: Used as a rehabilitation tool, 3D printing technology has demonstrated significant potential in improving upper and lower motor recovery for people with certain neurological conditions in high-middle-income countries. Future research should explore the implementation feasibility and effectiveness of these technologies across different neurological conditions and income settings, particularly in low- and lower-middle-income countries.
Aggerwal et al. (Mon,) studied this question.