Stroke rehabilitation
While there is now an increasing number of RCTs testing the efficacy of telerehabilitation, it is hard to draw conclusions about the effects as interventions and comparators varied greatly across studies. In addition, there were few adequately powered studies and several studies included in this review were at risk of bias. At this point, there is only low or moderate‐level evidence testing whether telerehabilitation is a more effective or similarly effective way to provide rehabilitation. Short‐term post‐hospital discharge telerehabilitation programmes have not been shown to reduce depressive symptoms, improve quality of life, or improve independence in activities of daily living when compared with usual care. Studies comparing telerehabilitation and in‐person therapy have also not found significantly different outcomes between groups, suggesting that telerehabilitation is not inferior. Some studies reported that telerehabilitation was less expensive to provide but information was lacking about cost‐effectiveness. Only two trials reported on whether or not any adverse events had occurred; these trials found no serious adverse events were related to telerehabilitation. The field is still emerging and more studies are needed to draw more definitive conclusions. In addition, while this review examined the efficacy of telerehabilitation when tested in randomised trials, studies that use mixed methods to evaluate the acceptability and feasibility of telehealth interventions are incredibly valuable in measuring outcomes.
Background Range of motion (ROM) is a critical component of a physician's evaluation for many consultations. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if teleconference goniometry could be as accurate as clinical goniometry. Methods Forty-eight volunteers participated in the study. There was a sample size of 52 elbows. Each measurement was recorded consecutively in person, through teleconference, and still-shot photography by two researchers trained in goniometry. Measurements of maximum elbow flexion and extension were taken and recorded. Results Teleconference goniometry had a high agreement with clinical goniometry (Pearson coefficient: flexion: 0.93, Extension: 0.87). Limits of agreement found from the Bland-Altman test were 7⁰ and -3⁰ for flexion and 10.4⁰ and -7.4⁰ for extension. A t-test revealed a P-value of less than 0.001 between teleconference and clinical measurements, proving the data are significant. Conclusions ROM measurements through a teleconferencing medium are comparable to clinical ROM measurements. This would allow for interactive elbow ROM assessment with the orthopedist without having to incorporate travel time and expenses.
Gait and gate aids
Venkataraman K, Amis K, Landerman LR, Caves K, Koh GC, Hoenig H. Teleassessment of Gait and Gait Aids: Validity and Interrater Reliability. Phys Ther. 2020 Jan 27.
BACKGROUND:
Gait and mobility aid assessments are important components of rehabilitation. Given the increasing use of telehealth to meet rehabilitation needs, it is important to examine the feasibility of such assessments within the constraints of telerehabilitation.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of the Tinetti Performance-Oriented Mobility Assessment gait scale (POMA-G) and cane height assessment under various video and transmission settings to demonstrate the feasibility of teleassessment.
DESIGN: This repeated-measures study compared the test performances of in-person, slow motion (SM) review, and normal-speed (NS) video ratings at various fixed frame rates (8, 15, and 30 frames per second [fps]) and bandwidth (128, 384, and 768 kB/s configurations.
METHODS: Overall bias, validity, and interrater reliability were assessed for in-person, SM video, and NS video ratings, with SM video rating as the gold standard, as well as for different frame rate and bandwidth configurations within NS videos.
RESULTS: There was moderate to good interrater reliability for the POMA-G (ICC = 0.66-0.77 across all configurations) and moderate validity for in-person (β = 0.62; 95% CI = 0.37-0.87) and NS video (β = 0.74; 95% CI = 0.67-0.80) ratings compared with SM video rating. For cane height, interrater reliability was good (ICC = 0.66-0.77), although it was significantly lower at the lowest frame rate (8 fps) (ICC = 0.66; 95% CI = 0.54-0.76) and bandwidth (128 kB/s) (ICC = 0.69; 95% CI = 0.57-0.78) configurations. Validity for cane height was good for both in-person (β = 0.80; 95% CI = 0.62-0.98) and NS video (β = 0.86; 95% CI = 0.81-0.90) ratings compared with SM video rating.
LIMITATIONS: Some lower frame rate and bandwidth configurations may limit the reliability of remote cane height assessments.
CONCLUSIONS: Teleassessment for POMA-G and cane height using typically available internet and video quality is feasible, valid, and reliable.
Intervention
Low back pain Self Management
OBJECTIVE: We explored patients' experiences of using Internet-based self-management support for low back pain (LBP) in primary care, with and without physiotherapist telephone guidance.
DESIGN: Exploratory descriptive qualitative study using thematic analysis, nested within a randomized feasibility trial.
METHODS:Patients with LBP who participated in a feasibility trial of the SupportBack Internet intervention (ISRCTN: 31034004) were invited to take part in semistructured telephone interviews after the three-month intervention period (a convenience sample from within the trial population). Fifteen participants took part (age range = 36-87 years, 66.7% female, characteristics representative of the trial population). Data were analyzed thematically.
RESULTS: Analysis resulted in the development of six themes (subthemes in parentheses): Perceptions of SupportBack's design (Clarity and ease of use, Variety and range of information provided, Need for specificity and flexibility), Engaging with the SupportBack intervention, Promoting positive thought processes (Reassurance, Awareness of self-management), Managing behavior with SupportBack (Motivation and goal setting, Using activity as a pain management strategy, Preferences for walking or gentle back exercises), Feeling supported by telephone physiotherapists (Provision of reassurances and clarity, Physiotherapists are motivating), Severity and comorbidity as barriers (Preexisting condition or severity acting as a barrier, Less useful for mild low back pain).
CONCLUSIONS: The Internet intervention SupportBack appeared to feasibly support self-management of LBP. Reassurance and ongoing support to implement behavioral changes were central to reported benefits. The addition of physiotherapist telephone support further enhanced the patient experience and the potential utility of the intervention.
van Vugt VA, van der Wouden JC, Essery R, et al. Internet based vestibular rehabilitation with and without physiotherapy support for adults aged 50 and older with a chronic vestibular syndrome in general practice: three armed randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2019;367:l5922. Published 2019 Nov 5. doi:10.1136/bmj.l5922
OBJECTIVE:
To investigate the clinical effectiveness and safety of stand alone and blended internet based vestibular rehabilitation (VR) in the management of chronic vestibular syndromes in general practice.
DESIGN:
Pragmatic, three armed, parallel group, individually randomised controlled trial.
SETTING: 59 general practices in the Netherlands.
PARTICIPANTS:322 adults aged 50 and older with a chronic vestibular syndrome.
INTERVENTIONS: Stand alone VR comprising a six week, internet based intervention with weekly online sessions and daily exercises (10-20 minutes a day). In the blended VR group, the same internet based intervention was supplemented by face-to-face physiotherapy support (home visits in weeks 1 and 3). Participants in the usual care group received standard care from a general practitioner, without any restrictions.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was vestibular symptoms after six months as measured by the vertigo symptom scale-short form (VSS-SF range 0-60, clinically relevant difference ≥3 points). Secondary outcomes were dizziness related impairment, anxiety, depressive symptoms, subjective improvement of vestibular symptoms after three and six months, and adverse events.
RESULTS: In the intention-to-treat analysis, participants in the stand alone and blended VR groups had lower VSS-SF scores at six months than participants in the usual care group (adjusted mean difference -4.1 points, 95% confidence interval -5.8 to -2.5; and -3.5 points, -5.1 to -1.9, respectively). Similar differences in VSS-SF scores were seen at three months follow-up. Participants in the stand alone and blended VR groups also experienced less dizziness related impairment, less anxiety, and more subjective improvement of vestibular symptoms at three and six months. No serious adverse events related to online VR occurred during the trial.
CONCLUSION: Stand alone and blended internet based VR are clinically effective and safe interventions to treat adults aged 50 and older with a chronic vestibular syndrome. Online VR is an easily accessible form of treatment, with the potential to improve care for an undertreated group of patients in general practice.