Effectiveness of Telerehabilitation in Physical Therapy: A Rapid Overview

Pamela Seron, María-Jose Oliveros, Ruvistay Gutierrez-Arias, Rocío Fuentes-Aspe, Rodrigo C Torres-Castro, Catalina Merino-Osorio, Paula Nahuelhual, Jacqueline Inostroza, Yorschua Jalil, Ricardo Solano, Gabriel N Marzuca-Nassr, Raul Aguilera-Eguía, Pamela Lavados-Romo, Francisco J Soto-Rodríguez, Cecilia Sabelle, Gregory Villarroel-Silva, Patricio Gomolán, Sayen Huaiquilaf, Paulina Sanchez, Pamela Seron, María-Jose Oliveros, Ruvistay Gutierrez-Arias, Rocío Fuentes-Aspe, Rodrigo C Torres-Castro, Catalina Merino-Osorio, Paula Nahuelhual, Jacqueline Inostroza, Yorschua Jalil, Ricardo Solano, Gabriel N Marzuca-Nassr, Raul Aguilera-Eguía, Pamela Lavados-Romo, Francisco J Soto-Rodríguez, Cecilia Sabelle, Gregory Villarroel-Silva, Patricio Gomolán, Sayen Huaiquilaf, Paulina Sanchez

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this article was to summarize the available evidence from systematic reviews on telerehabilitation in physical therapy.

Methods: We searched Medline/PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. In addition, the records in PROSPERO and Epistemonikos and PEDro were consulted. Systematic reviews of different conditions, populations, and contexts-where the intervention to be evaluated is telerehabilitation by physical therapy-were included. The outcomes were clinical effectiveness depending on specific condition, functionality, quality of life, satisfaction, adherence, and safety. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were carried out by a reviewer with non-independent verification by a second reviewer. The findings are reported qualitatively in the tables and figures.

Results: Fifty-three systematic reviews were included, of which 17 were assessed as having low risk of bias. Fifteen reviews were on cardiorespiratory rehabilitation, 14 on musculoskeletal conditions, and 13 on neurorehabilitation. The other 11 reviews addressed other types of conditions and rehabilitation. Thirteen reviews evaluated with low risk of bias showed results in favor of telerehabilitation versus in-person rehabilitation or no rehabilitation, while 17 reported no differences between the groups. Thirty-five reviews with unclear or high risk of bias showed mixed results.

Conclusions: Despite the contradictory results, telerehabilitation in physical therapy could be comparable with in-person rehabilitation or better than no rehabilitation for conditions such as osteoarthritis, low-back pain, hip and knee replacement, and multiple sclerosis and also in the context of cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation. It is imperative to conduct better quality clinical trials and systematic reviews.

Impact: Providing the best available evidence on the effectiveness of telerehabilitation to professionals, mainly physical therapists, will impact the decision-making process and therefore yield better clinical outcomes for patients, both in these times of the COVID-19 pandemic and in the future. The identification of research gaps will also contribute to the generation of relevant and novel research questions.

Keywords: Digital Health; E-Health; Remote Physical Therapy; Telehealth; Telemedicine; Telerehabilitation.

© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Physical Therapy Association.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Summary of effectiveness results of telerehabilitation in musculoskeletal conditions by risk of bias assessment.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Summary of effectiveness results of telerehabilitation in neurological conditions by risk of bias assessment.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Summary of effectiveness results of telerehabilitation in cardiopulmonary conditions by risk of bias assessment.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Summary of effectiveness results of telerehabilitation in others health conditions by risk of bias assessment.

References

    1. World Health Organization . World Report on Ageing and Health. 2015. Accessed July 2020. .
    1. World Health Organization . Rehabilitation in Health Systems. 2017. Accessed July 2020. .
    1. World Confederation for Physical Therapy . Policy statement: description of physical therapy. 2017. Accessed June 2020.
    1. Falvey JR, Murphy TE, Gill TM, Stevens-Lapsley JE, Ferrante LE. Home health rehabilitation utilization among Medicare beneficiaries following critical illness. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020;68:1512–1519.
    1. Zziwa S, Babikako H, Kwesiga D, et al. Prevalence and factors associated with utilization of rehabilitation services among people with physical disabilities in Kampala, Uganda. A descriptive cross sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2019;19:1–11.
    1. Deslauriers S, Déry J, Proulx K, et al. Effects of waiting for outpatient physiotherapy services in persons with musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil. 2019;43:611–620.
    1. Rogante M, Grigioni M, Cordella D, Giacomozzi C. Ten years of telerehabilitation: a literature overview of technologies and clinical applications. Neuro Rehabilitation. 2010;27:287–304.
    1. Kairy D, Lehoux P, Vincent C, Visintin M. A systematic review of clinical outcomes, clinical process, healthcare utilization and costs associated with telerehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31:427–447.
    1. Bettger JP, Resnik LJ. Telerehabilitation in the age of COVID-19: an opportunity for learning health system research. Phys Ther. 2020;100:1913–1916.
    1. Turolla A, Rossettini G, Viceconti A, Palese A, Geri T. Musculoskeletal physical therapy during the COVID-19 pandemic: is telerehabilitation the answer? Phys Ther. 2020;100:1260–1264.
    1. Quigley A, Johnson H, McArthur C. Transforming the provision of physiotherapy in the time of COVID-19: a call to action for telerehabilitation. Physiother Can. 2020;73:e20200031.
    1. Alpalhão V, Alpalhão M. Impact of COVID-19 on physical therapist practice in Portugal. Phys Ther. 2020;100:1052–1053.
    1. Peretti A, Amenta F, Tayebati SK, Nittari G, Mahdi SS. Telerehabilitation: review of the state-of-the-art and areas of application. JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol. 2017;4:e7.
    1. Hailey D, Roine R, Ohinmaa A, Dennett L. Evidence of benefit from telerehabilitation in routine care: a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17:281–287.
    1. Munro J, Angus N, Leslie SJ. Patient focused internet-based approaches to cardiovascular rehabilitation—a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2013;19:347–353.
    1. Pietrzak E, Cotea C, Pullman S, Nasveld P. Self-management and rehabilitation in osteoarthritis: is there a place for internet-based interventions? Telemed e-Health. 2013;19:800–805.
    1. Johansson T, Wild C. Telerehabilitation in stroke care—a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2011;17:1–6.
    1. Wieland L, Falzon L, Sciamanna C, et al. Interactive computer-based interventions for weight loss or weight maintenance in overweight or obese people. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012;8:CD007675.
    1. Almojaibel A. Delivering pulmonary rehabilitation for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease at home using telehealth: a review of the literature. Saudi J Med Med Sci. 2016;4:164.
    1. Sarfo FS, Ulasavets U, Opare-Sem OK, Ovbiagele B. Tele-rehabilitation after stroke: an updated systematic review of the literature. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2018;27:2306–2318.
    1. Cristo D d, Nascimento NP d, Dias AS, Sachetti A. Telerehabilitation for cardiac patients: systematic review. Int J Cardiovasc Sci. 2018;31:443–450.
    1. Jansson MM, Rantala A, Miettunen J, Puhto AP, Pikkarainen M. The effects and safety of telerehabilitation in patients with lower-limb joint replacement: a systematic review and narrative synthesis. J Telemed Telecare. 2020;1357633X20917868.
    1. Liu P, Li G, Jiang S, et al. The effect of smart homes on older adults with chronic conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Geriatr Nurs (Minneap). 2019;40:522–530.
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.
    1. Serón P, Oliveros MJ, Fuentes-Aspe R, Gutiérrez-Arias R. Efectividad de la telerehabilitación en terapia física: protocolo de una revisión global en tiempos que exigen respuestas rápidas. Medwave. 2020;20:e7970.
    1. Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, Elmagarmid A. Rayyan-a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5:1–10.
    1. Harris PA, Taylor R, Minor BL, et al. The REDCap consortium: building an international community of software platform partners. J Biomed Inform. 2019;95:103208.
    1. Whiting P, Savović J, Higgins JPT, et al. ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;69:225–234.
    1. Cottrell MA, Galea OA, O’Leary SP, Hill AJ, Russell TG. Real-time telerehabilitation for the treatment of musculoskeletal conditions is effective and comparable to standard practice: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Rehabil. 2017;31:625–638.
    1. Dario AB, Moreti Cabral A, Almeida L, et al. Effectiveness of telehealth-based interventions in the management of non-specific low back pain: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Spine J. 2017;17:1342–1351.
    1. Schäfer AGM, Zalpour C, Von Piekartz H, Hall TM, Paelke V. The efficacy of electronic health-supported home exercise interventions for patients with osteoarthritis of the knee: systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20:1–16.
    1. Nicholl BI, Sandal LF, Stochkendahl MJ, et al. Digital support interventions for the self-management of low back pain: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19:e179.
    1. Shukla H, Nair SR, Thakker D. Role of telerehabilitation in patients following total knee arthroplasty: evidence from a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2016;23:339–346.
    1. Srikesavan C, Bryer C, Ali U, Williamson E. Web-based rehabilitation interventions for people with rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2019;25:263–275.
    1. Wang X, Hunter DJ, Vesentini G, Pozzobon D, Ferreira ML. Technology-assisted rehabilitation following total knee or hip replacement for people with osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019;20:506.
    1. Heapy AA, Higgins DM, Cervone D, Wandner L, Fenton BT, Kerns RD. A systematic review of technology-assisted self-management interventions for chronic pain: looking across treatment modalities. Clin J Pain. 2015;31:470–492.
    1. Joice MG, Bhowmick S, Amanatullah DF. Perioperative physiotherapy in total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2017;40:e765–e773.
    1. Grona SL, Bath B, Busch A, Rotter T, Trask C, Harrison E. Use of videoconferencing for physical therapy in people with musculoskeletal conditions: a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2018;24:341–355.
    1. Pastora-Bernal JM, Martín-Valero R, Barón-López FJ, Estebanez-Pérez MJ. Evidence of benefit of telerehabilitation after orthopedic surgery: a systematic review. J Med Internet Res. 2017;19:1–13.
    1. Jiang S, Xiang J, Gao X, Guo K, Liu B. The comparison of telerehabilitation and face-to-face rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2018;24:257–262.
    1. Khan F, Amatya B, Kesselring J, Galea M. Telerehabilitation for persons with multiple sclerosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;4:CD010508.
    1. Laver KE, Adey-Wakeling Z, Crotty M, Lannin NA, George S, Sherrington C. Telerehabilitation services for stroke. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;1:CD010255.
    1. Rintala A, Hakala S, Paltamaa J, Heinonen A, Karvanen J, Sjögren T. Effectiveness of technology-based distance physical rehabilitation interventions on physical activity and walking in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40:373–387.
    1. Appleby E, Gill ST, Hayes LK, Walker TL, Walsh M, Kumar S. Effectiveness of telerehabilitation in the management of adults with stroke: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2019;14:1–18.
    1. Chen J, Jin W, Zhang XX, Xu W, Liu XN, Ren CC. Telerehabilitation approaches for stroke patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2015;24:2660–2668.
    1. Schröder J, van Criekinge T, Embrechts E, et al. Combining the benefits of tele-rehabilitation and virtual reality-based balance training: a systematic review on feasibility and effectiveness. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2019;14:2–11.
    1. Camden C, Pratte G, Fallon F, Couture M, Berbari J, Tousignant M. Diversity of practices in telerehabilitation for children with disabilities and effective intervention characteristics: results from a systematic review. Disabil Rehabil. 2019;0:1–13.
    1. Tchero H, Teguo MT, Lannuzel A, Rusch E. Telerehabilitation for stroke survivors: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Med Internet Res. 2018;20:1–10.
    1. Xiaoyan Z, Pu W, Lijiao Y, et al. Home-based telerehabilitation for stroke survivors: a systematic review. Chinese J Evidence-Based Med. 2019;19:1226–1232.
    1. Di Tella S, Pagliari C, Blasi V, Mendozzi L, Rovaris M, Baglio F. Integrated telerehabilitation approach in multiple sclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2020;26:385–399.
    1. Rintala A, Päivärinne V, Hakala S, et al. Effectiveness of technology-based distance physical rehabilitation interventions for improving physical functioning in stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2019;100:1339–1358.
    1. Huang K, Liu W, He D, et al. Telehealth interventions versus center-based cardiac rehabilitation of coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2015;22:959–971.
    1. Lundell S, Holmner Å, Rehn B, Nyberg A, Wadell K. Telehealthcare in COPD: a systematic review and meta-analysis on physical outcomes and dyspnea. Respir Med. 2015;109:11–26.
    1. Rawstorn JC, Gant N, Direito A, Beckmann C, Maddison R. Telehealth exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Heart. 2016;102:1183–1192.
    1. Su JJ, Yu DSF, Paguio JT. Effect of eHealth cardiac rehabilitation on health outcomes of coronary heart disease patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2020;76:754–772.
    1. Brørs G, Pettersen TR, Hansen TB, et al. Modes of e-health delivery in secondary prevention programmes for patients with coronary artery disease: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19:364.
    1. Jin K, Khonsari S, Gallagher R, et al. Telehealth interventions for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2019;18:260–271.
    1. McCabe C, McCann M. Brady. AM. Management in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;5:CD011425.
    1. Neubeck L, Redfern JU, Fernandez R, Briffa T, Bauman A, Ben FS. Telehealth interventions for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease: a systematic review. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2009;16:281–289.
    1. Hamilton SJ, Mills B, Birch EM, Thompson SC. Smartphones in the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2018;18:25.
    1. Hwang R, Bruning J, Morris N, Mandrusiak A, Russell T. A systematic review of the effects of telerehabilitation in patients with cardiopulmonary diseases. J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2015;35:380–389.
    1. Chan C, Yamabayashi C, Syed N, Kirkham A, Camp PG. Exercise telemonitoring and telerehabilitation compared with traditional cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Physiother Can. 2016;68:242–251.
    1. Frederix I, Vanhees L, Dendale P, Goetschalckx K. A review of telerehabilitation for cardiac patients. J Telemed Telecare. 2015;21:45–53.
    1. Seiler A, Klaas V, Tröster G, Fagundes CP. eHealth and mHealth interventions in the treatment of fatigued cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychooncology. 2017;26:1239–1253.
    1. Huang JW, Lin YY, Wu NY. The effectiveness of telemedicine on body mass index: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2019;25:389–401.
    1. Adamse C, Dekker-Van Weering MGH, van Etten-Jamaludin FS, Stuiver MM. The effectiveness of exercise-based telemedicine on pain, physical activity and quality of life in the treatment of chronic pain: a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2018;24:511–526.
    1. Geraedts H, Zijlstra A, Bulstra SK, Stevens M, Zijlstra W. Effects of remote feedback in home-based physical activity interventions for older adults: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2013;91:14–24.
    1. Agostini M, Moja L, Banzi R, et al. Telerehabilitation and recovery of motor function: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Telemed Telecare. 2015;21:202–213.
    1. An JY, Hayman LL, Park YS, Dusaj TK, Ayes CG. Web-based weight management programs for children and adolescents: a systematic review of randomized controlled trial studies. Adv Nurs Sci. 2009;32:222–240.
    1. Connelly J, Kirk A, Masthoff J, Macrury S. The use of technology to promote physical activity in type 2 diabetes management: a systematic review. Diabet Med. 2013;30:1420–1432.
    1. Kopp LM, Gastelum Z, Guerrero CH, Howe CL, Hingorani P, Hingle M. Lifestyle behavior interventions delivered using technology in childhood, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors: a systematic review. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2017;64:13–17.
    1. van Egmond MA, van der Schaaf M, Vredeveld T, et al. Effectiveness of physiotherapy with telerehabilitation in surgical patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Physiother (United Kingdom). 2018;104:277–298.
    1. Ambrosino N, Fracchia C. The role of tele-medicine in patients with respiratory diseases. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2017;11:893–900.
    1. Amatya B, Khan F, Galea M. Rehabilitation for people with multiple sclerosis: an overview of Cochrane reviews. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019;1:CD012732.
    1. Oldridge N, Pakosh M, Grace SL. A systematic review of recent cardiac rehabilitation meta-analyses in patients with coronary heart disease or heart failure. Future Cardiol. 2019;15:227–249.
    1. Negrini S, Grabljevec K, Boldrini P, et al. Up to 2.2 million people experiencing disability suffer collateral damage each day of COVID-19 lockdown in Europe. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2020;56:361–365.
    1. Boldrini P, Garcea M, Brichetto G, et al. Living with a disability during the pandemic. “Instant paper from the field” on rehabilitation answers to the COVID-19 emergency. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2020;56:331–334.
    1. Negrini S, Donzelli S, Negrini A, Negrini A, Romano M, Fabio Z. Feasibility and acceptability of telemedicine to substitute outpatient rehabilitation services in the COVID-19 emergency in Italy: an observational everyday clinical-life study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2020;101:2027–2032.
    1. Negrini S, Kiekens C, Bernetti A, et al. Telemedicine from research to practice during the pandemic. “Instant paper from the field” on rehabilitation answers to the COVID-19 emergency. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2020;56:327–330.
    1. Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction—GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:383–394.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors en medewerkers

Medische omstandigheden

Geneesmiddelinterventies

3
Abonneren