How are you taking part in this consultation?

You will not be able to change how you comment later.

You must be signed in to answer questions

  • Question on Consultation

    Has all of the relevant evidence been taken into account?
  • Question on Consultation

    Are the summaries of clinical and cost effectiveness reasonable interpretations of the evidence?
  • Question on Consultation

    Are the recommendations sound and a suitable basis for guidance to the NHS?
  • Question on Consultation

    Are there any equality issues that need special consideration and are not covered in the medical technology consultation document?
The content on this page is not current guidance and is only for the purposes of the consultation process.

1 Recommendations

1.1 GaitSmart rehabilitation exercise programme shows promise for gait and mobility issues in people at risk of falls, and people having hip or knee replacements. But there is not enough evidence to support the case for routine adoption. So, it is only recommended for use in research.

1.2 Further research is needed on the clinical effectiveness of GaitSmart, including:

  • studies with larger populations

  • comparative studies

  • studies that investigate using GaitSmart alongside standard care

  • drop-out rates and adherence.

Why the committee made these recommendations

The clinical evidence on GaitSmart in people at risk of falls, and people having hip or knee replacements is limited. 11 studies were identified as relevant to GaitSmart, but only 3 measured the effect of GaitSmart in people at risk of falls, and only 1 measured the effect in people having hip or knee replacements. Just 1 of the studies in people at risk of falls has been peer reviewed, and none compared GaitSmart to standard care. The one study in people having hip or knee replacements was small and has not been peer reviewed. The cost analysis shows that GaitSmart is cost saving compared with standard care. But the clinical benefits and costs of GaitSmart combined with standard care compared with standard care alone are unknown. So, more research is needed.