Biofeedback loop-assisted rehabilitation
Biofeedback loop-assisted rehabilitation has been studied in 1 paper since 2026: 1 trial in people; 1 in the past year. The newest paper, Feb 4, 2026: “Application of biofeedback loop in rehabilitation optimization after robot-assisted total knee replacement”.
1 paper studies it3 findingsUpdated
See all 1 papers on biofeedback loop-assisted rehabilitation
At a glance
The findings reach people, from one lab or study. 1 lab in 1 country.
“the observation group had significantly higher KSS scores at 12 weeks postoperatively than the control group (P<0.05)”
None of its findings points the other way.
- 1 lab in 1 country
- Human trial1
Studies in people
1 study gave biofeedback loop-assisted rehabilitation to people and measured what changed.
| What changed | Design | People | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
up: Improves knee Association Scoring down: Decreases recovery time30% shorter up: Improves gait symmetry | Randomized trial12 weeks | 160 people | Research Square, Feb 4, 2026 |
What did studies of biofeedback loop-assisted rehabilitation find?
3Studies of biofeedback loop-assisted rehabilitation measured 3 outcomes: gait symmetry, recovery time and knee Association Scoring.
Gait symmetry
upin humans1
1 study
Gait symmetry
upin humans1
Biofeedback loop-assisted rehabilitation improves gait symmetry in humans.
“At 6 months, the observation group exhibited better gait symmetry and muscle activation efficiency (P<0.05).”
Human trial6 monthsn = 160
Research SquarePreprint
Recovery time
downin humans1−30% shorter
1 study
Recovery time
downin humans1−30% shorter
Biofeedback loop-assisted rehabilitation decreases recovery time in humans (30% shorter).
“with 30% shorter recovery time”
Human trial12 weeksn = 160
Research SquarePreprint
Knee Association Scoring
upin humans1
1 study
Knee Association Scoring
upin humans1
Biofeedback loop-assisted rehabilitation improves knee Association Scoring in humans.
“the observation group had significantly higher KSS scores at 12 weeks postoperatively than the control group (P<0.05)”
Human trial12 weeksn = 160
Research SquarePreprint