The era of technology in healthcare: an evaluation of telerehabilitation on patient outcomes-a systematic review and meta-analysis protocol

The Era of Technology in Healthcare-An Evaluation of Telerehabilitation on Client Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to synthesize the evidence and examine the effect of telerehabilitation interventions compared to face-to-face rehabilitation interventions on physical functioning, mental health, and pain reduction among employed individuals, 18 years old and older.

METHODS

Following the Preferred Reporting Items of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a comprehensive search syntax was created and inputted into Ovid Medline, APA PsycINFO, Ovid Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus. Critical appraisal of the included studies was conducted by two researchers to assess the risk of bias. A meta-analysis was completed for the randomized controlled trials and GRADE was used to determine the certainty of the evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 16 out of 4319 articles were included in this review. This systematic review and meta-analysis found no significant differences between telerehabilitation interventions for physical functioning, mental health, and pain reduction outcomes compared to traditional rehabilitation interventions.

CONCLUSION

The study findings indicate that telerehabilitation is less effective than in-person care for occupational therapy and physical therapy services. Future research may look at addressing the limitations of the current study to produce more conclusive results, such as exploring the length of the intervention, knowledge and confidence of intervention application, and follow-ups.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

This systematic review has been registered with PROSPERO under registration number CRD42022297849 on April 8th, 2022.

Investigation of the barriers to and functional outcomes of telerehabilitation in patients with hand injury

BACKGROUND

Telerehabilitation is an approach that is growing in importance and rapidly becoming more prevalent. However, the potential barriers to this approach and its effectiveness relative to face-to-face treatment still need to be determined.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate the technology and access barriers, implementation and organizational challenges, and communication barriers faced by patients undergoing postoperative telerehabilitation after hand tendon repair surgery. It also aimed to investigate the effect of telerehabilitation on pain, kinesiophobia, and functional outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, open-label, nonrandomized comparative clinical study.

METHODS

The study was conducted with 44 patients who underwent tendon repair surgery due to tendon injuries of the extrinsic muscles of the hand. Participants were divided into two groups (face-to-face group and telerehabilitation group). All participants received three physiotherapy sessions per week for 8 weeks from their surgery (via video conference using mobile phones to the telerehabilitation group). An early passive motion protocol was applied for flexor tendon and zone 5-7 extensor tendon repairs. Mallet finger rehabilitation was performed for zone 2 extensor tendon repairs, while an early active short arc approach was used for zone 3-4 repairs. The telerehabilitation and face-to-face groups received the same treatment protocols three times a week. In the eighth week of treatment (in the 24th session), the Turkish version of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Injury Questionnaire (DASH-T) and Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia were administered to all patients. The telerehabilitation group also underwent a barrier questionnaire. A pretreatment assessment could not be conducted. The independent-sample t-test was used for DASH-T data, and the Mann-Whitney U-test was used for Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia to compare groups.

RESULTS

In the study, there were 24 participants (age: 31.58 ± 12.02 years) in the face-to-face group and 20 participants (age: 39.25 ± 12.72 years) in the telerehabilitation group. The two groups were similar in terms of DASH-T and pain (p = 0.103, effect size = 0.647, and p = 0.086, effect size = 0.652, respectively) in the 8 weeks. However, the telerehabilitation group had a higher fear of movement (p = 0.017, effect size = 3.265). The most common barriers to telerehabilitation practices were the fear of damaging the tendon repair and the need for help during the treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

We determined that face-to-face treatment in acute physiotherapy for patients who have undergone tendon repair may be more effective compared to telerehabilitation, as it appears to be less likely to induce kinesiophobia. However, in situations where face-to-face treatment is not possible (such as lockdown), telerehabilitation can also be preferred after at least one in-person session to teach and perform exercises.

Heart failure patients' experiences of telerehabilitation

In the UK, almost 1 million people are living with heart failure, with heart and circulatory diseases accounting for 27% of all deaths, according to the British Heart Foundation. Current heart failure guidelines support cardiac rehabilitation as an intervention to reduce cardiovascular events, increase exercise tolerance and enhance patients' quality of life. Research indicates that telerehabilitation is an effective component of heart failure management, which helps overcome perceived barriers to cardiac rehabilitation including travel to appointments, long waiting times and accessibility. Understanding patient experiences and increasing telerehabilitation among heart failure patients is pertinent to implementing person-centred care, reducing risk and optimising quality of life.

Telerehabilitation Is a Valid Option for Total Knee Arthroplasty Patients: A Retrospective Pilot Study Based on Our Experience during the COVID-19 Pandemic

INTRODUCTION

Total knee arthroplasty is an effective operation. Post-surgery rehabilitation, based on early and intensive progressive exercise programs, plays a substantial role and telerehabilitation can be an effective safe option. This retrospective study aimed to compare traditional in-presence rehabilitation and telerehabilitation for total knee arthroplasty, based on our experience during the Italian COVID-19 lockdown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 164 patients (94 females and 70 males) enrolled in 2020 within 2 weeks after total knee replacement to perform post-operative outpatient rehabilitation. The clinical results of 82 patients (mean age 66.8 ± 10.2 years) performing telerehabilitation with those obtained from a similar cohort of 82 patients (mean age 65.4 ± 11.8 years) performing traditional in-presence outpatient rehabilitation were compared. Clinical outcomes were examined by comparing the gait speed (Time Up and Go-TUG test), the range of motion, the pain intensity (VAS), the functional status (Oxford Knee Score-OKS and Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-KOOS) and the overall satisfaction (Self-administered patient satisfaction scale) 12 weeks after the beginning of the physiotherapeutic protocol.

RESULTS

Telerehabilitation was non-inferior to traditional in-presence rehabilitation in all of the investigated areas and no statistical difference in terms of effectiveness was detected at 12 weeks, as confirmed by the respective patient-reported outcome scores such as TUG test (reduced from 20 ± 2 s to 12 ± 1.5 s for the telerehab cohort and from 18 ± 1.5 s to 13.1 ± 2 s for the in-presence rehabilitation one), pain VAS, OKS (improved from 22 ± 1.3 to 36 ± 2.7 for the telerehab cohort and from 23 ± 2.1 to 35.1 ± 4.2 for the in-presence group), KOOS (improved from 46.2 ± 10.2 to 67.4 ± 3.8 for the telerehabilitation cohort and from 48.4 ± 8.4 to 68.3 ± 6.6 for the other group), and the Self-administered patient satisfaction scale (more than two-thirds of patients globally satisfied with the results of their surgery in both groups).

CONCLUSION

The telerehabilitation program was effective after total knee replacement and yielded clinical outcomes that were not inferior to conventional outpatient protocols.