Mobile motion capture is a promising technology for assessing physical movement; markerless motion capture systems (MLSs) offer great potential in rehabilitation settings, given their accessibility compared to marker-based motion capture systems (MBSs). This review explores the current literature on rehabilitation, for direct comparison of movement-related outcomes captured by MLSs to MBSs and for application of MLSs in movement measurements. Following a scoping review methodology, nine databases were searched (May to August 2023). Eligible articles had to present at least one estimate of the mean difference between a measure of a physical movement assessed by MLS and by MBS. Sixteen studies met the selection criteria and were included. For comparison of MLSs with MBSs, measures of mean joint range of motion (ROM) displacement were found to be similar, while peak joint angle outcomes were significantly different. Upper body movement outcomes were found to be comparable, while lower body movement outcomes were very different. Overall, nearly two-thirds of measurements identified statistical differences between MLS and MBS outcomes. Regarding application, no studies assessed the technology with patient populations. Further MLS-specific research with consideration of patient populations (e.g., intentional error testing, testing in less-than-ideal settings) would be beneficial for utilization of motion capture in rehabilitation contexts.

Introduction Vaginal pain during intercourse and urinary incontinence are common complaints after gynaecological cancer treatments. Pelvic health physiotherapy treatments aim at optimising function through education on the use of vaginal moisturisers, dilation therapy programme and pelvic floor muscle training. Given that barriers such as time, travel, and costs are known to limit access to physiotherapy services, a virtual pelvic health physiotherapy programme may help to facilitate access. The primary objective of this study is to identify preferences, barriers and facilitators from individuals with gynaecological cancer regarding virtual pelvic healthcare survivorship care. Methods and analysis This patient-oriented, mixed-methods study will involve an online cross-sectional survey data (phase I) and qualitative data from a series of virtual focus groups (phase II). Phase I: an anonymous survey will be used to assess the demographics, health status, prevalence of urogenital symptoms, as well as knowledge, barriers and facilitators to pelvic health services of people with gynaecological cancer. A total of N=50 participants from Canada will be recruited through convenience and self-selection sampling. Phase II: a series of virtual semi-structured focus groups will be conducted with 10–15 participants on key topics related to virtual pelvic healthcare. Interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed, from which key themes and quotes will be identified. An interpretive description qualitative method will guide analysis and implementation of results. Ethics and dissemination Approval from the Health Research Ethics Board of Alberta—Cancer Committee (HREBA.CC-21-0498) and of the CISSS Bas-Saint-Laurent (CISSSBSL-2021-10) have been obtained. Informed, electronically signed consent will be required from all participants. Results from this work will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and will be used to inform the development and implementation of a new Pelvic eHealth Module for individuals treated for gynaecological cancers. This module will be incorporated into a comprehensive educational and exercise programme offered by a web-based application.

Background: Patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are recommended to measure the impact of a health condition or intervention effectiveness as they aim to capture what is most meaningful to patients. Several PROMs are used to evaluate pelvic organ prolapse (POP)‐related domains, yet the measurement properties of these instruments have not been fully explored with a rigorous analysis of the methodological quality and quality of evidence.Objective: To conduct a systematic review reporting on the measurement properties of PROMs used for the assessment of POP‐related domains in accordance with the COSMIN guidelines.Search Strategy: Five databases were searched from inception to December 2023.Selection Criteria: Studies were eligible if they involved (1) at least one group of female adults diagnosed with or presenting with symptoms of POP; (2) a self‐reported outcome measure (PROMs, questionnaires) to evaluate POP‐related domains; and (3) at least one measurement property.Data Collection and Analysis: Methodological quality and measurement quality were assessed using the COSMIN risk of bias (ROB) checklist and the COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties.Main Results: A total of 13 PROMs were included. The BIPOP had the lowest ROB for Content Validity. The POP‐SS was the only PROM with sufficient evidence of adequate construct validity and responsiveness to be used in both surgical and conservative management settings.Conclusion: This original work identified a gap in evidence regarding the measurement qualities of identified PROMs used in the POP population.

Background: The clinical characteristics of sarcopenia, including low muscular strength, are commonly seen among people with multiple myeloma. A scoping review was conducted to explore the role of exercise as a potential countermeasure for sarcopenia in this population. Our objectives were to (1) describe the design and findings of the studies and (2) identify the outcomes used in exercise-related studies to characterize sarcopenia. Methods: A systematic search (to March 2025) was conducted for published studies involving exercise or physical activity for individuals with multiple myeloma using key databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus). Results: Of 971 articles reviewed, 12 articles were included, involving 967 total participants and 624 with multiple myeloma. All 12 studies included a measure for muscle physical performance, 9 studies included measures for muscular strength, and 7 studies included measures for muscle quantity/quality. Five studies reported a significant improvement from exercise for measures of muscular strength, four studies reported a significant benefit for physical performance, and three studies reported a benefit in muscle quantity. Few studies included outcomes that met all the international criteria recommended to characterize sarcopenia. Conclusions: Further multicentre research trials are needed to better understand whether and how exercise may be helpful for people with multiple myeloma, especially in the context of sarcopenia.