Expert comments

Comments on this technology were invited from clinical experts working in the field and relevant patient organisations. The comments received are individual opinions and do not represent NICE's view.

Two of 3 experts were familiar with or had used this technology before.

Level of innovation

All of the experts considered the device to be innovative. They thought the device would be a useful addition to standard care or that they would need further information before determining if it could replace standard care. Three experts mentioned passive motion or other active devices as alternatives to the technology. But, they noted that these were bigger devices that are more expensive and cumbersome, and may not be reusable or provide the same level of functions.

Potential patient impact

All of the experts mentioned the ability to use the device at home or less need for hospital visits as potential patient benefits, particularly because of the COVID-19 pandemic. They also mentioned, as further patient benefits, the fact that it is non-invasive, care can be self-directed, it is easy to learn how to use and is likely to have few side effects.

Potential system impact

The experts identified fewer hospital visits, the relative cheapness of the treatment and the fact that it is non-invasive as potential system benefits. The benefits of a reduced need for visits during the COVID-19 pandemic were highlighted. But there was a concern raised that some patients, particularly those with cognitive difficulties, or with low adherence with exercise regimes, could be disadvantaged by having fewer hospital visits.

General comments

Two experts stated that the technology was likely to reduce costs, and 1 stated that it would be cost neutral and cost incurring at worse. All the experts considered the technology to be safe and the potential for harm to be low. One expert who had not used the device speculated that if the technology does not work it may delay effective treatment in some patients. They considered that further research was needed.