# Advanced Clinical-Based Technologies for Monitoring Physical Function in Breast Cancer Survivors: Scoping Review

## TL;DR

This review maps technologies used to monitor physical function in breast cancer survivors, highlighting gaps in standardization and clinical translation.

## Contribution

The study provides a systematic synthesis of advanced clinical technologies for assessing physical function in breast cancer survivors, mapping their use across domains and settings.

## Key findings

- Commonly used technologies include balance platforms, isokinetic dynamometry, and digital inclinometers.
- Heterogeneity in study designs and outcome reporting limits direct comparisons between technologies.
- Most studies focused on balance, muscle strength, and range of motion in female survivors.

## Abstract

People surviving breast cancer often face long-term impairments in physical function, significantly impacting their quality of life. In recent years, a variety of technologies have been developed to monitor and assess these functions; however, there is no consolidated synthesis linking specific technologies to targeted functional domains and real-world clinical contexts, limiting comparability and translation into practice.

This scoping review aimed to systematically explore and map the use of advanced clinic-based technologies for assessing and monitoring key physical functions, such as balance, muscle strength, and range of motion, among individuals surviving breast cancer. The purpose of this review was not only to identify which technologies have been applied but also to clarify how they are being used, the clinical settings, target physical functions, assessment protocols, and types of outcomes measured. It further summarized the current patterns of use to inform and enhance clinical assessment practices.

A comprehensive literature search was conducted across MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases, with no publication date restrictions. Eligible studies included adults with breast cancer assessed using advanced clinic-based technologies to monitor physical function. Screening and selection followed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The data extraction captured study characteristics, participant demographics, technologies applied, and related outcomes. The extracted data were organized in Covidence and synthesized descriptively to map the types of technologies, assessed functional domains, and application settings across studies.

Across the 17 included studies, the participants (N=719; age range between 30 and 75 years) were predominantly female and largely drawn from stage 0 to III breast cancer cohorts; 1 (5.9%) study reported a single male participant, and 2 (11.8%) studies did not specify participant sex. Among the 17 included studies, 11 (64.7%) were published from 2017 onward. Technologies spanned balance platforms (force plates, Technobody-PK 200 WL, Sensory Organization Test; 5/17, 29.4%), isokinetic dynamometry (Biodex systems; 4/17, 23.5%), and range of motion assessment via motion capture (3/17, 17.6%) or digital inclinometers (5/17, 29.4%). Sample sizes per study ranged from 20 to 100 participants (median 43), and follow-up durations varied from 1 session to 6 months.

Advanced clinic-based technologies for assessing balance, muscle strength, and range of motion in breast cancer survivors were identified across the literature, including balance platforms, isokinetic dynamometry, digital inclinometers, and markerless motion capture systems. Considerable heterogeneity in devices, outcome reporting, and study designs limited direct comparison across studies and prevented definitive conclusions about the superiority or clinical readiness of any single technology.