Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38477069›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2024

Evidence-based position paper on Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) professional practice on telerehabilitation. The European PRM position (UEMS PRM Section).

Mauro Zampolini, Aydan Oral, Nikolaos Barotsis, Catarina Aguiar Branco, Helena Burger, Paolo Capodaglio, Fitnat Dincer, Alessandro Giustini, Xiaolei Hu, Ingebjorg Irgens and 4 more

Open access · diamondAbstract readSystematic ReviewConsensus Statement
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

14 authors at 8 institutions in 7 countries.

Mauro ZampoliniUSL Umbria2, Foligno Hospital, Perugia, Italy.
Aydan OralDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Türkiye - aydanoral@yahoo.com.
Nikolaos BarotsisPhysical and Rehabilitation Medicine Clinic, Naxos, Greece.
Catarina Aguiar BrancoDepartment of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Hospital of Entre o Douro e Vouga E.P.E., Porto, Portugal.
Helena BurgerUniversity Rehabilitation Institute of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Paolo CapodaglioOrthopedic Rehabilitation Unit and Research Lab in Biomechanics, Rehabilitation and Ergonomics, San Giuseppe Hospital, Istituto Auxologico Italiano, IRCCS, Verbania, Italy.
Fitnat DincerDepartment of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye.
Alessandro GiustiniSan Pancrazio Rehabilitation Hospital, Arco, Trento, Italy.
Xiaolei HuDepartment of Community Medicine and Rehabilitation, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Ingebjorg IrgensDepartment of Research, Sunnaas Rehabilitation Hospital, Nesoddtangen, Norway.
Stefano NegriniDepartment of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University "La Statale", Milan, Italy.
Piotr TederkoDepartment of Rehabilitation, Center of Postgraduate Medical Education, Otwock, Poland.
Iuly TregerDepartment of Rehabilitation, Soroka University Medical Center, Beer-Sheva, Israel.
Carlotte KiekensIRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi · ITCentro Hospitalar de Entre o Douro e Vouga E.P.E. · PTIstanbul University · TRSoroka Medical Center · ILSunnaas sykehus · NOUmeå University · SEUniversity of Turin · ITUniverzitetni Rehabilitacijski Inštitut · SI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe evidence on the utility and effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions delivered via telerehabilitation is growing rapidly. Telerehabilitation is expected to have a key role in rehabilitation in the future.

aimThe aim of this evidence-based position paper (EBPP) is to improve PRM physicians' professional practice in telerehabilitation to be delivered to improve functioning and to reduce activity limitations and/or participation restrictions in individuals with a variety of disabling health conditions.

methodsTo produce recommendations for PRM physicians on telerehabilitation, a systematic review of the literature and a consensus procedure by means of a Delphi process have been performed involving the delegates of all European countries represented in the UEMS PRM Section.

resultsThe systematic literature review is reported together with the 32 recommendations resulting from the Delphi procedure.

conclusionsIt is recommended that PRM physicians deliver rehabilitation services remotely, via digital means or using communication technologies to eligible individuals, whenever required and feasible in a variety of health conditions in favor of the patient and his/her family, based on evidence of effectiveness and in compliance with relevant regulations. This EBPP represents the official position of the European Union through the UEMS PRM Section and designates the professional role of PRM physicians in telerehabilitation.

Indexed as

Physical and Rehabilitation MedicineTelerehabilitationDelphi TechniqueEuropeEuropean UnionEvidence-Based MedicineHumansProfessional Practice

Identifiers

PMID38477069
PMCPMC11135123
OpenAlexW4392768395

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.