Wearable electronic devices for chronic pain intensity assessment: A systematic review

Abstract

Wearable electronic devices are a convenient solution to pain intensity assessment as they can provide continuous monitoring for more precise medication adjustments. However, there is little evidence regarding the use of wearable electronic devices for chronic pain intensity assessment. Our primary objective was to examine the physiologic parameters used by wearable electronic devices for chronic pain intensity assessment. We initially inquired PubMed, CINAHL, and Embase for studies evaluating the use of wearable electronic devices for chronic pain intensity assessment. We updated our inquiry by searching on PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar. English peer‐reviewed studies were included, with no exclusions based on time frame or publication status. Of 348 articles that were identified on the first inquiry, 8 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Of 179 articles that were identified on the last inquiry, only 1 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. We found articles evaluating wristbands, smartwatches, and belts. Parameters evaluated were psychomotor and sleep patterns, space and time mobility, heart rate variability, and skeletal muscle electrical activity. Most of the studies found significant positive associations between physiological parameters measured by wearable electronic devices and self‐reporting pain scales. Wearable electronic devices reliably reflect physiologic or biometric parameters, providing a physiological correlation for pain. Early stage investigation suggests that the degree of pain intensity can be discerned, which ideally will reduce the bias inherent to existing numeric/verbal scales. Further research on the use of these devices is vital.

Development of an AI-Enabled System for Pain Monitoring Using Skin Conductance Sensoring in Socks

“…This is similar to earlier studies, where different machine learning algorithms were used on physiological and sometimes social cues to classify stressful and calm or neutral situations, with similar accuracy results as were found in this study. 2,17,[23][24][25][26][27] Electrodermal activity, or skin conductance, was also shown to be the preferred physiological method used on wearables and to detect emotional responses to stimuli. 28 Furthermore, in another study RFP was proposed to be the most accurate to handle medical applications.…”

Bioelectronic Devices for Targeted Drug Delivery and Monitoring of Microbial Electrogenesis

“…Current pharmacological treatments for chronic pain are often ineffective, associated with adverse effects, or prone to abuse and addiction. Therefore, there is an urgent need for alternative approaches that can provide safe, effective, and personalized pain relief [22]. In this thesis, we have explored the avenues of using bioelectronic devices such as OEIPs to deliver pharmaceutically relevant drug molecules to quench the pain signal directly at the peripheral nerves by developing device technologies that translates from in vitro all the way to in vivo.…”

“Listen to Your Immune System When It’s Calling for You”: Monitoring Autoimmune Diseases Using the iShU App

“…Several studies review wearable sensors in stress and pain detection [ 80 , 81 , 82 ], electrical brain activity [ 83 ], skin hardness [ 84 ], hypoglycemic events [ 85 , 86 , 87 , 88 ], and inflammation [ 89 ]. The useful physiological signs described in the mentioned studies are heart activity (i.e., ECG—Electrocardiogram) and blood volume pulse (BVP), brain activity (i.e., EEG—Electroencephalogram), muscle and neural activity (i.e., EMG—Electromyography), electrodermal activity (EDA), body temperature, and respiratory activity, which are organized in Table 2 with the attributed commercialized and divulgated wearable sensors.…”