Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21348905›Full record

ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2012

An exploration of chronic pain patients' perceptions of home telerehabilitation services.

Karlijn Cranen, Constance H C Drossaert, Evelien S Brinkman, Annemarie L M Braakman-Jansen, Maarten J Ijzerman, Miriam M R Vollenbroek-Hutten

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 56 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
56citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

56 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Smartphone app in self-management of chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2018
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Karlijn CranenRoessingh Research and Development, Enschede, The Netherlands. k.cranen@rrd.nl
Constance H C Drossaert
Evelien S Brinkman
Annemarie L M Braakman-Jansen
Maarten J Ijzerman
Miriam M R Vollenbroek-Hutten

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo explore patients' perceptions regarding prospective telerehabilitation services and the factors that facilitate or impede patients' intentions to use these services.

designUsing semi-structured interviews, patients reflected on the pros and cons of various scenarios of prospective telerehabilitation services. Patients' arguments were first arranged according to the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). Next, using inductive analysis, the data for each UTAUT component were analysed and arranged into subthemes. SETTING AND

participantsTwenty-five chronic pain patients were selected from a rehabilitation centre in the Netherlands.

resultsOverall, participants considered telerehabilitation helpful as a complementary or follow-up treatment, rather than an autonomous treatment. Arguments mainly related to the UTAUT constructs of 'performance expectancy' and 'facilitating conditions'. Patients valued the benefits such as reduced transportation barriers, flexible exercise hours and the possibility to better integrate skills into daily life. However, many patients feared a loss of treatment motivation and expressed concerns about both reduced fellow sufferer contact and reduced face-to-face therapist contact. Few arguments related to 'social norms' and 'effort expectancy'.

conclusionsThe effect of telerehabilitation on healthcare strongly depends on patients' willingness to use. Our study showed that chronic pain patients valued the benefits of telerehabilitation but hesitate to use it as an autonomous treatment. Therefore, future initiatives should maintain traditional care to some degree and focus on patients' attitudes as well. Either by giving information to increase patients' confidence in telerehabilitation or by addressing reported drawbacks into the future design of these services. Further quantitative studies are needed to explore patients' intentions to use telerehabilitation.

Indexed as

Patient PreferencePerceptionAdultAgedAttitude to ComputersChronic PainFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMaleMiddle AgedMotivationNetherlandsSocial IsolationSocial SupportTelemedicine

Identifiers

PMID21348905
PMCPMC5060638

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.