Physical mobility is essential to health, and patients often rate it as a high-priority clinical outcome. Digital mobility outcomes (DMOs), such as real-world gait speed or step count, show promise as clinical measures in many medical conditions. However, current research is nascent and fragmented by discipline. This scoping review maps existing evidence on the clinical utility of DMOs, identifying commonalities across traditional disciplinary divides. In November 2019, 11 databases were searched for records investigating the validity and responsiveness of 34 DMOs in four diverse medical conditions (Parkinson’s disease, multiple sclerosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hip fracture). Searches yielded 19,672 unique records. After screening, 855 records representing 775 studies were included and charted in systematic maps. Studies frequently investigated gait speed (70.4% of studies), step length (30.7%), cadence (21.4%), and daily step count (20.7%). They studied differences between healthy and pathological gait (36.4%), associations between DMOs and clinical measures (48.8%) or outcomes (4.3%), and responsiveness to interventions (26.8%). Gait speed, step length, cadence, step time and step count exhibited consistent evidence of validity and responsiveness in multiple conditions, although the evidence was inconsistent or lacking for other DMOs. If DMOs are to be adopted as mainstream tools, further work is needed to establish their predictive validity, responsiveness, and ecological validity. Cross-disciplinary efforts to align methodology and validate DMOs may facilitate their adoption into clinical practice.

Background: The development of optimal strategies to treat impaired mobility related to ageing and chronic disease requires better ways to detect and measure it. Digital health technology, including body worn sensors, has the potential to directly and accurately capture real-world mobility. Mobilise-D consists of 34 partners from 13 countries who are working together to jointly develop and implement a digital mobility assessment solution to demonstrate that real-world digital mobility outcomes have the potential to provide a better, safer, and quicker way to assess, monitor, and predict the efficacy of new interventions on impaired mobility. The overarching objective of the study is to establish the clinical validity of digital outcomes in patient populations impacted by mobility challenges, and to support engagement with regulatory and health technology agencies towards acceptance of digital mobility assessment in regulatory and health technology assessment decisions. Methods/design: The Mobilise-D clinical validation study is a longitudinal observational cohort study that will recruit 2400 participants from four clinical cohorts. The populations of the Innovative Medicine Initiative-Joint Undertaking represent neurodegenerative conditions (Parkinson’s Disease), respiratory disease (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease), neuro-inflammatory disorder (Multiple Sclerosis), fall-related injuries, osteoporosis, sarcopenia, and frailty (Proximal Femoral Fracture). In total, 17 clinical sites in ten countries will recruit participants who will be evaluated every six months over a period of two years. A wide range of core and cohort specific outcome measures will be collected, spanning patient-reported, observer-reported, and clinician-reported outcomes as well as performance-based outcomes (physical measures and cognitive/mental measures). Daily-living mobility and physical capacity will be assessed directly using a wearable device. These four clinical cohorts were chosen to obtain generalizable clinical findings, including diverse clinical, cultural, geographical, and age representation. The disease cohorts include a broad and heterogeneous range of subject characteristics with varying chronic care needs, and represent different trajectories of mobility disability. Discussion: The results of Mobilise-D will provide longitudinal data on the use of digital mobility outcomes to identify, stratify, and monitor disability. This will support the development of widespread, cost-effective access to optimal clinical mobility management through personalised healthcare. Further, Mobilise-D will provide evidence-based, direct measures which can be endorsed by regulatory agencies and health technology assessment bodies to quantify the impact of disease-modifying interventions on mobility. Trial registration: ISRCTN12051706.

Background: Reduced mobility is a central feature of COPD. Assessment of mobility outcomes that can be measured digitally (digital mobility outcomes (DMOs)) in daily life such as gait speed and steps per day is increasingly possible using devices such as pedometers and accelerometers, but the predictive value of these measures remains unclear in relation to key outcomes such as hospital admission and survival.Methods: We conducted a systematic review, nested within a larger scoping review by the MOBILISE-D consortium, addressing DMOs in a range of chronic conditions. Qualitative and quantitative analysis considering steps per day and gait speed and their association with clinical outcomes in COPD patients was performed.Results: 21 studies (6076 participants) were included. Nine studies evaluated steps per day and 11 evaluated a measure reflecting gait speed in daily life. Negative associations were demonstrated between mortality risk and steps per day (per 1000 steps) (hazard ratio (HR) 0.81, 95% CI 0.75–0.88, p<0.001), gait speed (<0.80 m·s⁻¹) (HR 3.55, 95% CI 1.72–7.36, p<0.001) and gait speed (per 1.0 m·s⁻¹) (HR 7.55, 95% CI 1.11–51.3, p=0.04). Fewer steps per day (per 1000) and slow gait speed (<0.80 m·s⁻¹) were also associated with increased healthcare utilisation (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.72–0.88, p<0.001; OR 3.36, 95% CI 1.42–7.94, p=0.01, respectively). Available evidence was of low-moderate quality with few studies eligible for meta-analysis.Conclusion: Daily step count and gait speed are negatively associated with mortality risk and other important outcomes in people with COPD and therefore may have value as prognostic indicators in clinical trials, but the quantity and quality of evidence is limited. Larger studies with consistent methodologies are called for.

Background: Despite the importance of gait as a determinant of falls, disability and mortality in older people, understanding of gait impairment in COPD is limited. This study aimed to identify differences in gait characteristics during supervised walking tests between people with COPD and healthy controls.Methods: We searched 11 electronic databases, supplemented by Google Scholar searches and manual collation of references, in November 2019 and updated the search in July 2021. Record screening and information extraction were performed independently by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second. Meta-analyses were performed in studies not considered at a high risk of bias.Results: Searches yielded 21 085 unique records, of which 25 were included in the systematic review (including 1015 people with COPD and 2229 healthy controls). Gait speed was assessed in 17 studies (usual speed: 12; fast speed: three; both speeds: two), step length in nine, step duration in seven, cadence in six, and step width in five. Five studies were considered at a high risk of bias. Low-quality evidence indicated that people with COPD walk more slowly than healthy controls at their usual speed (mean difference (MD) −19 cm·s⁻¹, 95% CI −28 to −11 cm·s⁻¹) and at a fast speed (MD −30 cm·s⁻¹, 95% CI −47 to −13 cm·s⁻¹). Alterations in other gait characteristics were not statistically significant.Conclusion: Low-quality evidence shows that people with COPD walk more slowly than healthy controls, which could contribute to an increased falls risk. The evidence for alterations in spatial and temporal components of gait was inconclusive. Gait impairment appears to be an important but understudied area in COPD.

Rationale: The effect of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions on physical activity (PA) outcomes is not fully elucidated in patients with COPD. The objectives of the present study were to provide estimation of treatment effects of all available interventions on PA outcomes in patients with COPD and to provide recommendations regarding the future role of PA outcomes in pharmacological trials.Materials and methods: This review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and reported in line with PRISMA. Records were identified through searches of 12 scientific databases; the most updated search was performed in January 2023.Results: 74 studies published from 2000 to 2021 were included, with a total of 8140 COPD patients. Forced expiratory volume in 1 s % predicted ranged between 31% and 74%, with a mean of 55%. Steps/day constituted the most frequently assessed PA outcome in interventional studies. Compared to usual care, PA behavioural modification interventions resulted in improvements in the mean (95% CI) steps/day when implemented alone (by 1035 (576–1493); p<0.00001) or alongside exercise training (by 679 (93–1266); p=0.02). Moreover, bronchodilator therapy yielded a favourable difference of 396 (125–668; p=0.004) steps/day, compared to placebo.Conclusions: PA behavioural modification and pharmacological interventions lead to significant improvements in steps/day, compared to control and placebo groups, respectively. Compared to bronchodilator therapy, PA behavioural modification interventions were associated with a 2-fold greater improvement in steps/day. Large-scale pharmacological studies are needed to establish an intervention-specific minimal clinically important difference for PA outcomes as well as their convergent validity to accelerate qualification as potential biomarkers and efficacy end-points for regulatory approval.