OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment delivered via real-time telerehabilitation for the management of musculoskeletal conditions, and to determine if real-time telerehabilitation is comparable to conventional methods of delivery within this population.
DATA SOURCES: Six databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PEDro, psycINFO, CINAHL) were searched from inception to November 2015 for literature which reported on the outcomes of real-time telerehabilitation for musculoskeletal conditions.
REVIEW METHODS: Two reviewers screened 5913 abstracts where 13 studies (n = 1520) met the eligibility criteria. Methodological quality was assessed using the Downs & Black 'Checklist for Measuring Quality' tool. Results were pooled for meta-analysis based upon primary outcome measures and reported as standardised mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS: Aggregate results suggest that telerehabilitation is effective in the improvement of physical function (SMD 1.63, 95%CI 0.92-2.33, I(2)=93%), whilst being slightly more favourable (SMD 0.44, 95%CI 0.19-0.69, I(2)=58%) than the control cohort following intervention. Sub-group analyses reveals that telerehabilitation in addition to usual care is more favourable (SMD 0.64, 95%CI 0.43-0.85, I(2)=10%) than usual care alone, whilst treatment delivered solely via telerehabilitation is equivalent to face-to-face intervention (SMD MD 0.14, 95% CI -0.10-0.37, I(2) = 0%) for the improvement of physical function. The improvement of pain was also seen to be comparable between cohorts (SMD 0.66, 95%CI -0.27-1.60, I(2)=96%) following intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: Real-time telerehabilitation appears to be effective and comparable to conventional methods of healthcare delivery for the improvement of physical function and pain in a variety of musculoskeletal conditions.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Long term conditions are a significant health problem faced by older people worldwide. Telephone communication is often used to deliver health care to patients and is an important tool in improving access to care. Previous research has shown that primary health care nurses communicate with patients by telephone, but little is known about the way in which telephone communication can be used to benefit older patients with long term conditions. The aims of this review were to identify the range and scope of telephone use between practice nurses working in primary health care and older people with long term conditions, explore which elements of this communication has been successful, and determine whether older people see telephone communication as useful for their needs.
METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was conducted through CINAHL, Medline, Web of Science and EMBASE between July and August 2015. Included were English language articles containing older adults, primary care nurses and both qualitative and quantitative designs.
RESULTS: Five studies met the inclusion criteria. All were intervention studies, and none looked at routine telephone communication between nurse and patient. Most studies showed that telephone based interventions were successful in improving pre-determined disease-specific health indicators.
CONCLUSIONS: All telephone communication interventions in this review focused on a specific long term condition, which they aimed to help patients self-manage. While all studies' samples included older patients, they did not consider them separately in relation to the effectiveness of the intervention. What was also lacking was the patient perspective regarding effectiveness in all but one study.
INTRODUCTION: Increased physical activity and functional ability are the goals of total knee replacement surgery. Therefore, adequate rehabilitation is required for the recovery of patients after discharge from hospital following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). This systematic literature review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of home telerehabilitation in patients who underwent TKA. METHODS: Studies published in the English language between 2000 and 2014 were retrieved from Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane databases using relevant search strategies. Two researchers independently reviewed the studies as per the Cochrane methodology for systematic literature review. We considered telerehabilitation sessions as those that were conducted by experienced physiotherapists, using videoconferencing to patients’ homes via an internet connection. The outcomes assessed included: knee movement (knee extension and flexion); quadriceps muscle strength; functional assessment (the timed up-and-go test); and assessment of pain, stiffness, and functional capacity using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and visual analogue scale for pain. RESULTS: In total, 160 potentially relevant studies were screened. Following the screening of studies as abstracts and full-text publications, six primary publications (four randomized controlled trials, one non-randomized controlled trial, and one singlearm trial) were included in the review. Patients experienced high levels of satisfaction with the use of telerehabilitation alone. There was no significant difference in change in active knee extension and flexion in the home telerehabilitation group as compared to the control group (mean difference (MD) -0.52, 95% CI -1.39 to 0.35, <i>p</i> = 0.24 and MD 1.14, 95% CI -0.61 to 2.89, <i>p</i> = 0.20, respectively). The patients in the home telerehabilitation group showed improvement in physical activity and functional status similar to patients in the conventional therapy group. DISCUSSION: The evidence from this systematic literature review demonstrated that telerehabilitation is a practical alternative to conventional face-to-face rehabilitation therapy in patients who underwent TKA. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
INTRODUCTION: In the last few years, the use of telecommunication and mobile technology has grown significantly. This has led to a notable increase in the utilization of this telecommunication in healthcare, namely phone calls and text messaging (SMS). However, evaluating its global impact on improving healthcare processes and outcomes demands a more comprehensive assessment. In this study, we focused on the role of mobile devices via phone calls and SMS in patient-doctor communication, and aimed to assess its impact on various health outcomes.
METHODS: Major databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Global Health, and Cochrane CENTRAL, were searched for clinical trials that investigated mobile-device technology in any facet of doctor-patient communication published between 1990 and April 2015. A meta-analysis was performed where appropriate.
RESULTS: Sixty-two articles met our inclusion criteria. Of those, 23 articles investigated mobile appointment reminder technologies, 19 investigated medication adherence, 20 investigated disease-control interventions, and two investigated test-result reporting. Patients who received an appointment reminder were 10% less likely to miss an appointment (relative risk [RR] = 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.15). Mobile interventions increased medication adherence by 22% (RR = 1.22, 95% CI 1.09-1.36). Ten of 20 studies examining disease control reported statistically significant reductions in clinically meaningful endpoints. The use of mobile-device interventions improved forced expiratory volume in 1 second and hemoglobin A1c percentage in meta-analyses.
CONCLUSION: The use of mobile-device technologies exerted modest improvements in communication and health outcomes. Further research is needed to determine the true effect of these technologies on doctor-patient communication.
OBJECTIVE: Telehealth interventions have proven efficacy in healthcare, but little is known about the results of such interventions in palliative care. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate caregiver outcomes related to palliative telehealth interventions.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched multiple databases for articles published between January 2003 and January 2015 related to telehealth in palliative care. Two hundred twenty-one articles were considered; nine of these met study inclusion criteria. Data on study design, population, interventions, methods, outcomes, conclusions, and methodological quality were extracted and evaluated by three investigators.
RESULTS: Of the nine studies, five measured caregiver quality of life, three measured caregiver anxiety, and two measured caregiver burden. All the studies measuring caregiver quality of life showed no significant difference after telehealth interventions. The caregiver anxiety score decreased after the intervention in two studies, and one study reported significantly reduced caregiver burden. Although feasibility of or caregiver satisfaction with the telehealth intervention was not the focus of this review, most studies reported such findings. Of the nine studies, the majority were rated as having moderate quality using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias.
CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests there is evidence of overall satisfaction in caregivers who undergo a telehealth intervention, but outcomes reported were often not substantial. Methodological flaws and small sample sizes negatively affected study quality. More rigorous research to test and evaluate such palliative interventions is needed.
BACKGROUND: The popularity of mobile phones and similar mobile devices makes it an ideal medium for delivering interventions. This is especially true with heart failure (HF) interventions, in which mHealth-based HF interventions are rapidly replacing their telephone-based predecessors.
PURPOSE: This systematic review examined the impact of mHealth-based HF management interventions on HF outcomes. The specific aims of the systematic review are to (1) describe current mHealth-based HF interventions and (2) discuss the impact of these interventions on HF outcomes.
METHODS: PubMed, CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and Scopus were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental studies that tested mHealth interventions in people with HF using the terms Heart Failure, Mobile Health, mHealth, Telemedicine, Text Messaging, Texting, Short Message Service, Mobile Applications, and Mobile Apps.
CONCLUSIONS: Ten articles, representing 9 studies, were included in this review. The majority of the studies utilized mobile health technology as part of an HF monitoring system, which typically included a blood pressure-measuring device, weighing scale, and an electrocardiogram recorder. The impact of the mHealth interventions on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, HF-related hospitalizations, length of stay, New York Heart Association functional class, left ventricular ejection fraction, quality of life, and self-care were inconsistent at best.
IMPLICATIONS: Further research is needed to conclusively determine the impact of mHealth interventions on HF outcomes. The limitations of the current studies (eg, inadequate sample size, quasi-experimental design, use of older mobile phone models, etc) should be taken into account when designing future studies.
OBJECTIVES: To review the use of telehealth in subjects with diabetic foot ulcer; evaluating its clinical outcomes, diagnostic accuracy, cost-effectiveness and behavioural perceptions.
DESIGN: Systematic review.
SETTING: Selected studies were conducted in Australia, USA, the Netherlands, Denmark, Poland and UK.
PARTICIPANTS: A total of 948 identified studies were evaluated against the inclusion criteria. Eleven eligible studies were included for review. Patients with diabetic foot ulcer had to have telehealth guided management.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Telehealth systems were evaluated against at least one of the following: clinical implications on ulcer healing and disease prognosis; diagnostic accuracy; cost-effectiveness; behavioural perceptions among health professionals or patients.
RESULT: Eleven eligible studies were included for review. Studies that evaluated telehealth against clinical outcomes were underpowered by study design, sample sizes and short duration follow-up. Telehealth systems demonstrated good intra- and inter-observer reproducibility, high diagnostic accuracy and agreement with live assessments. Authors rationalised the cost-effectiveness of their respective telehealth systems, but could not support this with long-term cost analysis. Both patient and health professionals responded positively towards telehealth in surveys and face-to-face interviews.
CONCLUSION: Telehealth yields high diagnostic accuracy, reproducibility and positive behavioural perceptions. However, it is not clear if telehealth use in diabetic foot management has favourable clinical and economic outcomes. More long-term prospective controlled trials on larger populations are needed to further characterise our findings.
OBJECTIVE: Telehealth is an approach to disease management, which may hold the potential of improving some of the features associated with COPD, including positive impact on disease progression, and thus possibly limiting further reduction in quality of life (QoL). Our objective was, therefore, to summarize studies addressing the impact of telehealth on QoL in patients with COPD.
DESIGN: Systematic review.
METHODS: A series of systematic searches were carried out using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov (last updated November 2015). A predefined search algorithm was utilized with the intention to capture all results related to COPD, QoL, and telehealth published since year 2000.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was QoL, assessed by validated measures.
RESULTS: Out of the 18 studies fulfilling the criteria for inclusion in this review, three studies found statistically significant improvements in QoL for patients allocated to telemedical interventions. However, all of the other included studies found no statistically significant differences between control and telemedical intervention groups in terms of QoL.
CONCLUSION: Telehealth does not make a strong case for itself when exclusively looking at QoL as an outcome, since statistically significant improvements relative to control groups have been observed only in few of the available studies. Nonetheless, this does not only rule out the possibility that telehealth is superior to standard care with regard to other outcomes but also seems to call for more research, not least in large-scale controlled trials.
BACKGROUND: E-health interventions have become increasingly popular, including in perioperative care. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of perioperative e-health interventions on the postoperative course.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and searched for relevant articles in the PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL and COCHRANE databases. Controlled trials written in English, with participants of 18 years and older who underwent any type of surgery and which evaluated any type of e-health intervention by reporting patient-related outcome measures focusing on the period after surgery, were included. Data of all included studies were extracted and study quality was assessed by using the Downs and Black scoring system.
FINDINGS: A total of 33 articles were included, reporting on 27 unique studies. Most studies were judged as having a medium risk of bias (n = 13), 11 as a low risk of bias, and three as high risk of bias studies. Most studies included patients undergoing cardiac (n = 9) or orthopedic surgery (n = 7). All studies focused on replacing (n = 11) or complementing (n = 15) perioperative usual care with some form of care via ICT; one study evaluated both type of interventions. Interventions consisted of an educational or supportive website, telemonitoring, telerehabilitation or teleconsultation. All studies measured patient-related outcomes focusing on the physical, the mental or the general component of recovery. 11 studies (40.7%) reported outcome measures related to the effectiveness of the intervention in terms of health care usage and costs. 25 studies (92.6%) reported at least an equal (n = 8) or positive (n = 17) effect of the e-health intervention compared to usual care. In two studies (7.4%) a positive effect on any outcome was found in favour of the control group.
CONCLUSION: Based on this systematic review we conclude that in the majority of the studies e-health leads to similar or improved clinical patient-related outcomes compared to only face to face perioperative care for patients who have undergone various forms of surgery. However, due to the low or moderate quality of many studies, the results should be interpreted with caution.
To evaluate the effectiveness of treatment delivered via real-time telerehabilitation for the management of musculoskeletal conditions, and to determine if real-time telerehabilitation is comparable to conventional methods of delivery within this population.
DATA SOURCES:
Six databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, PEDro, psycINFO, CINAHL) were searched from inception to November 2015 for literature which reported on the outcomes of real-time telerehabilitation for musculoskeletal conditions.
REVIEW METHODS:
Two reviewers screened 5913 abstracts where 13 studies (n = 1520) met the eligibility criteria. Methodological quality was assessed using the Downs & Black 'Checklist for Measuring Quality' tool. Results were pooled for meta-analysis based upon primary outcome measures and reported as standardised mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS:
Aggregate results suggest that telerehabilitation is effective in the improvement of physical function (SMD 1.63, 95%CI 0.92-2.33, I(2)=93%), whilst being slightly more favourable (SMD 0.44, 95%CI 0.19-0.69, I(2)=58%) than the control cohort following intervention. Sub-group analyses reveals that telerehabilitation in addition to usual care is more favourable (SMD 0.64, 95%CI 0.43-0.85, I(2)=10%) than usual care alone, whilst treatment delivered solely via telerehabilitation is equivalent to face-to-face intervention (SMD MD 0.14, 95% CI -0.10-0.37, I(2) = 0%) for the improvement of physical function. The improvement of pain was also seen to be comparable between cohorts (SMD 0.66, 95%CI -0.27-1.60, I(2)=96%) following intervention.
CONCLUSIONS:
Real-time telerehabilitation appears to be effective and comparable to conventional methods of healthcare delivery for the improvement of physical function and pain in a variety of musculoskeletal conditions.
