Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 4, 2026

Endoscopic Bilateral Nipple-sparing Mastectomy via a Single Axillary Incision with Immediate Pre-pectoral Implant-based Breast Reconstruction
Published on: May 17, 2024
Feedback from wearable devices accelerates recovery after breast cancer surgery
Ahmed Latif1, Noer Al Janabi2, Meera Joshi3
1Imperial College London, Department of Surgery and Cancer, London, UK.
Background:
Axillary surgery for breast cancer is frequently associated with upper-limb morbidity, impacting quality of life. Structured exercise improves outcomes, but access to physiotherapy is inconsistent. Wearable devices offer objective post-operative monitoring and the potential for real-time rehabilitation support. This study aims to assess the impact of wearable-driven feedback on upper-limb recovery after axillary surgery, and to evaluate the usability, adherence, and acceptability of wearables during post-operative rehabilitation.
Methods:
In this prospective observational cohort study, patients undergoing axillary surgery at a tertiary breast unit were equipped with wearable devices to monitor upper-limb activity. Participants were allocated to basic-feedback (BF; fixed 60-min goal) or dynamic-feedback (DF; personalised weekly clinician-adjusted goals). Recovery was defined as post-operative activity relative to pre-operative baseline. An earlier prospective no-feedback (NF) cohort served as comparator.
Results:
Forty-nine patients were included: 10 DF, 10 BF, and 29 NF. Adherence was high (mean compliance 89.4%, SD 17.9). By postoperative day (POD) 8, DF patients exceeded baseline activity (103.2%, SD 30.6), outperforming BF (80.2%, SD 13.9) and NF (86.2%, SD 55.8). Recovery plateaued earliest in DF (POD 4), followed by BF (POD 5) and NF (POD 7). Among SLNB-only patients, DF recovered faster than NF, while BF and NF showed similar trajectories.
Conclusions:
Clinician-guided, wearable-driven feedback significantly accelerates upper-limb recovery following axillary surgery. These findings support further evaluation of this approach in larger randomized trials to determine clinical and cost-effectiveness.

