ArticleDie Rehabilitation2025
[Status and implementation conditions of digitally supported services in medical rehabilitation].
Article in Die Rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- User acceptance of telerehabilitation in Germany: a structural equation modeling approach based on the UTAUT2 model.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Investigating the Acceptance and Implementation Conditions of Telerehabilitation in Germany Among Patients and Health Care Professionals: Qualitative Interview Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic forced rehabilitation centres to adapt their daily care routine and their organisational processes to the corresponding circumstances. In this context, digitally supported services were expanded and further developed. This study aims to systematically take stock of digitally supported rehabilitation services in Germany, including factors hindering or facilitating their implementation.The nationwide explorative quantitative online survey explores a so-far understudied topic. Using a self-developed questionnaire based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research constructs, we surveyed the uptake and type of digitally supported rehabilitation services in medical rehabilitation departments, including implementation hindrances and facilitators.A total of 452 departments participated in the study and about half reported using digitally supported services in medical rehabilitation, with digital training and telerehabilitation aftercare being the most common. The primarily reported implementation hindrances were technology-related work interruptions and cost coverage/reimbursements uncertainties. Managerial support and the usefulness of the digitally supported services were perceived as particularly conducive for the implementation process, as was the staff involvement.The study provides a first overview of digitally supported services used in medical rehabilitation in Germany, and a better understanding of the factors hindering or facilitating their implementation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.