JMIR Publications

ABSTRACT

Background:

Parkinson’s disease (PD) impairs mobility and motor function, making accurate mobility assessment important for effective management and treatment planning. Traditional clinical assessments often rely on periodic clinical evaluations, which may not capture day-to-day symptom fluctuations. Wearable devices offer a promising alternative with continuous, objective tracking of mobility (e.g. gait). However, although these tools provide valuable insights for patients and clinicians, their successful implementation depends on their acceptability to users. This study explored the perspectives of people with PD and carers to identify key barriers, facilitators and preferences influencing the adoption of wearable devices for mobility monitoring in PD.

Objective:

This study aimed to explore the acceptability of wearable devices for remote continuous mobility monitoring in PD from the perspective of people with Parkinson’s and informal carers.

Methods:

This qualitative study recruited 72 people with PD and 20 informal carers and used semi-structured interviews to explore their views on wearable devices for digital mobility assessment. Interview data was analysed using Braun and Clarke’s six-phase thematic analysis.

Results:

Most people with PD were open to using wearable devices when they were seen to offer clear clinical value, particularly by capturing day-to-day fluctuations in mobility, reducing reliance on memory and supporting more informed discussions with clinicians. Acceptability was shaped by having a clear purpose, minimal burden and ease of use. Lightweight, discreet and familiar designs (e.g., watch-like devices) were generally preferred, and privacy concerns were typically balanced against perceived benefit. Carers valued wearable monitoring for the reassurance it offered, greater awareness of symptom changes and support with both clinical and everyday decision-making but emphasised that devices must be simple and easy to integrate into daily caregiving without adding burden.

Conclusions:

Wearable mobility monitoring was generally acceptable to people with PD and carers when they offered clear clinical value and fitted easily within everyday life. However, acceptability was conditional and depended on minimal burden, ease of use, meaningful feedback and reassurance that wearable monitoring would complement rather than replace clinical care. These findings suggest that successful implementation will require co-design with people with PD and carers, alongside thoughtful clinical integration, to ensure that wearable technologies are both acceptable and effective in practice.