Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35437833›Full record

ArticleJournal of evaluation in clinical practice2022

Telerehabilitation for physical disabilities and movement impairment: A service evaluation in South West England.

Sarah A Buckingham, Kim Sein, Krithika Anil, Sara Demain, Hilary Gunn, Ray B Jones, Bridie Kent, Angela Logan, Jonathan Marsden, E D Playford and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of evaluation in clinical practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Sarah A BuckinghamPeninsula Allied Health Centre, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2215-5516
Kim SeinPeninsula Allied Health Centre, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Krithika AnilPeninsula Allied Health Centre, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Sara DemainPeninsula Allied Health Centre, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Hilary GunnPeninsula Allied Health Centre, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Ray B JonesCentre for Health Technology, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Bridie KentSchool of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Angela LoganPeninsula Allied Health Centre, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
Jonathan MarsdenPeninsula Allied Health Centre, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.
E D PlayfordWarwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
Jenny FreemanPeninsula Allied Health Centre, School of Health Professions, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4072-9758
Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry · GBUniversity of Plymouth · GBRoyal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Southampton · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/V021060/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE, AIMS AND

objectivesTelerehabilitation was used to ensure continued provision of care during the COVID-19 pandemic, but there was a lack of guidance on how to use it safely and effectively for people with physical disabilities and movement impairment. In this service evaluation, we aimed to collate information on practitioner and patient experiences, challenges and facilitators, and examples of best practice to inform the development of an online toolkit and training package.

methodsGuided discussions were carried out with 44 practitioners, 7 patients and 2 carers from five health and social care organisations in South West England, and analysed thematically.

resultsPractitioners and patients had positive experiences of telerehabilitation and were optimistic about its future use. Recognized benefits for people with physical disabilities included greater flexibility, reduced travel and fatigue, having appointments in a familiar environment and ease of involving family members. Challenges encountered were: technological (usability issues, access to technology and digital skills); difficulties seeing or hearing patients; the lack of 'hands-on' care; and safety concerns. Facilitators were supported by colleagues or digital champions, and family members or carers who could assist patients during their appointments. Key themes in best practice were: person-centred and tailored care; clear and open communication and observation and preparation and planning. Practitioners shared tips for remote physical assessments; for example, making use of patient-reported outcomes, and asking patients to wear bright and contrasting coloured clothing to make it easier to see movement.

conclusionTelerehabilitation holds promise in health and social care, but it is necessary to share good practice to ensure it is safe, effective and accessible. We collated information and recommendations that informed the content of the Telerehab Toolkit (https://www.plymouth.ac.uk/research/telerehab), a practical resource for practitioners, patients and carers, with a focus on remote assessment and management of physical disabilities and movement impairment.

Indexed as

COVID-19Persons with DisabilitiesTelerehabilitationFamilyHumansPandemicsmovement impairmentphysical disabilitiesremote consultationstelerehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID35437833
PMCPMC9790516
OpenAlexW4224225810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.