Effectiveness of biofeedback-assisted asynchronous telerehabilitation in musculoskeletal care: A systematic review

Exploring the Importance of Race and Gender Concordance Between Patients and Physical Therapists in Digital Rehabilitation for Musculoskeletal Conditions: Observational, Longitudinal Study

BACKGROUND

Race/ethnicity and gender concordance between patients and providers is a potential strategy to improve health care interventions. In digital health, where human interactions occur both synchronously and asynchronously, the effect of concordance between patients and providers is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of race/ethnicity or gender concordance between patients and physical therapists (PTs) in engagement and the clinical outcomes following a digital care program (DCP) in patients with musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions.

METHODS

This secondary analysis of 2 prospective longitudinal studies (originally focused on assessing the acceptance, engagement, and clinical outcomes after a remote DCP) examined the impact of both race/ethnicity concordance and gender concordance between patients and PTs on outcomes for a digital intervention for MSK conditions. Outcomes included engagement (measured by the completion rate and communication, assessed by text interactions), satisfaction, and clinical outcomes (response rate, ie, percentage of patients achieving at least a minimal clinically important change in pain, measured by the Numerical Pain Rating Scale [NPRS]; anxiety, measured by the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item scale [GAD-7]; depression, measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item [PHQ-9]; and daily activity impairment, measured by the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment [WPAI] questionnaire).

RESULTS

Of 71,201 patients, 63.9% (n=45,507) were matched with their PT in terms of race/ethnicity, while 61.2% (n=43,560) were matched for gender. Concordant dyads showed a higher completion rate among White (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.11, 95% CI 1.05-1.19, P<.001) and Hispanic (aOR 1.27, 95% CI 1.08-1.54, P=.009) groups, as well as women (aOR 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.18, P<.001), when compared to discordant dyads. High and similar levels of interaction between patients and PTs were observed across race/ethnicity and gender dyads, except for Asian concordant dyads (adjusted β coefficient 5.32, 95% CI 3.28-7.36, P<.001). Concordance did not affect satisfaction, with high values (>8.52, 95% CI 8.27-8.77) reported across all dyads. Response rates for pain, anxiety, and daily activity impairment were unaffected by race/ethnicity concordance. An exception was observed for depression, with White patients reporting a higher response rate when matched with PTs from other races/ethnicities (aOR 1.20, 95% CI 1.02-1.39, P=.02). In terms of gender, men had a slightly higher pain response rate in discordant dyads (aOR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.15, P=.03) and a higher depression response rate in concordant dyads (aOR 1.23, 95% CI 1.05-1.47, P=.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Race/ethnicity and gender concordance between patients and PTs does not translate into higher satisfaction or improvement for most clinical outcomes, aside from a positive effect on treatment completion. These results highlight the importance of other PT characteristics, in addition to race/ethnicity or gender concordance, suggesting the potential benefit of experience, languages spoken, and cultural safety training as ways to optimize care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04092946, NCT05417685; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05417685, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04092946.

Telerehabilitation solutions in patient pathways: An overview of systematic reviews

Background

Telerehabilitation (TR), a branch of telemedicine, provides remote therapeutic rehabilitation through telecommunication. Driven by technological advances and benefits like remote monitoring and patient education, it has grown since 1998. The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic highlighted its importance in maintaining healthcare access.

Research question

What is the efficacy of TR compared to in-person rehabilitation? Are the assessment tools effective? Is TR well-accepted, and are costs reduced?

Methods

A bibliographic search on Medline, Cochrane and Google Scholar focused on systematic reviews (SRs) from 2014 to Mai 2024, comparing TR or home-based rehabilitation with in person treatments for various conditions. Independent reviewers conducted initial screenings, resolving disagreements by a third reviewer. Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist was used to evaluate the quality of review. The data was synthesised narratively.

Results

The search identified 665 SRs. After selection, 228 SR were included. TR models include synchronous (real-time video interactions), asynchronous (independent sessions through digital platforms) and mixed methods. Regardless of the medical fields, the conclusions of the SRs consistently point to the equivalence of TR compared to in-person rehabilitation. Remote evaluations via digital tools were reliable and valid for various assessments. TR is cost effectiveness and well accepted.

Conclusions

TR is a viable alternative or complement to traditional rehabilitation, offering enhanced accessibility, reduced costs and improved results. Barriers include technical issues, training and concerns about lack of physical contact. Mixed methods could address these challenges.

Digital therapeutics-based lumbar core exercise for patients with low back pain: A prospective exploratory pilot study

Objective

This study aimed to implement a digital therapeutics-based approach based on motion detection technology and analyze the clinical results for patients with chronic low back pain (LBP).

Methods

A prospective, single-arm clinical trial was conducted with 22 patients who performed mobile app-based sitting core twist exercise for 12 weeks. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale (VAS) for LBP, Oswestry Disability Index-Korean version (K-ODI), and EuroQol-5 dimension 5-level version (EQ-5D-5L) every 4 weeks after the initiation of treatment. Laboratory tests for factors associated with muscle metabolism, plain X-ray for evaluating sagittal balance, and magnetic resonance imaging for calculating cross-sectional area (CSA) of back muscles were performed at pretreatment and 12 weeks post-treatment.

Results

The study population included 20 female patients with an average age of 45.77 ± 15.45 years. The clinical outcomes gradually improved throughout the study period in the VAS for LBP (from 6.05 ± 2.27 to 2.86 ± 1.86), K-ODI (from 16.18 ± 6.19 to 8.64 ± 5.58), and EQ-5D-5L (from 11.09 ± 3.24 to 7.23 ± 3.89) (p < 0.001, respectively). The laboratory test results did not show significant changes. Pelvic incidence (from 53.99 ± 9.70° to 50.80 ± 9.20°, p = 0.002) and the mismatch between pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (from 8.97± .67° to 5.28 ± 8.57°, p = 0.027) decreased significantly. Additionally, CSA of erector spinae and total back muscles increased by 5.20% (p < 0.001) and 3.08% (p = 0.013), respectively.

Conclusions

The results of this study suggest that the efficacy of digital therapy-based lumbar core exercise for LBP is favorable. However, further large-scale randomized controlled studies are necessary.