Background:Following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, telerehabilitation (TR) has been expanding to address the challenges and risks of in-person delivery. It is likely that a level of TR delivery will continue after the pandemic because of its advantages, such as reducing geographical barriers to service. Many pandemic-related TR initiatives were put in place quickly. Therefore, we have little understanding of current TR delivery, barriers and facilitators, and how therapists anticipate integrating TR into current practice. Knowing this information will allow the incorporation of competencies specifically related to the use and provision of TR into professional profiles and entry-to-practice education, thereby promoting high-quality TR care.Objective:This study aimed to obtain a descriptive overview of current TR practice among rehabilitation therapists in Canada and the Netherlands and identify perceived barriers to and facilitators of practice.Methods:A web-based cross-sectional survey was conducted with occupational, physical, and respiratory therapists and dietitians in Canada (in French and English) and the Netherlands (in Dutch and English) between November 2021 and March 2022. Recruitment was conducted through advertisements on social media platforms and email invitations facilitated by regulatory and professional bodies. The survey included demographic and practice setting information; whether respondents delivered TR, and if so, components of delivery; confidence and satisfaction ratings with delivery; and barriers to and facilitators of use. TR satisfaction and uptake were measured using the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire and modified Technology Acceptance Model. Data were first summarized descriptively, and then, comparisons were conducted between professions.Results:Overall, 723 survey responses were received, mostly from Canada (n=666, 92.1%) and occupational therapists (n=434, 60%). Only 28.1% (203/723) reported receiving specific training in TR, with 1.2% (9/723) indicating that it was part of their professional education. Approximately 19.5% (139/712) reported not using TR at all, whereas most participants (366/712, 51.4%) had been using this approach for 1 to 2 years. Services delivered were primarily teleconsultation and teletreatment with individuals. Respondents offering TR were moderately satisfied with their service delivery and found it to be effective; 90.1% (498/553) indicated that they were likely to continue offering TR after the pandemic. Technology access, confidence, and setup were rated the highest as facilitators, whereas technology issues and the clinical need for physical contact were the most common barriers.Conclusions:Professional practice and experience with TR were similar in both countries, suggesting the potential for common strategic approaches. The high prevalence of current practice and strong indicators of TR uptake suggest that therapists are likely to continue TR delivery after the pandemic; however, most therapists (461/712, 64.7%) felt ill prepared for practice, and the need to target TR competencies during professional and postprofessional education is critical. Future studies should explore best practice for preparatory and continuing education.
BACKGROUND: Telemonitoring and telerehabilitation can support home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) and benefit patients with lung diseases or COVID-19. This study aimed to (1) identify which telemonitoring and telerehabilitation interventions (e.g. videoconferencing) are used to provide telehealth care for people with chronic respiratory conditions or COVID-19, and (2) provide an overview of the effects of telemonitoring and telerehabilitation on exercise capacity, physical activity, health-related QoL (HRQoL), and healthcare use in patients with lung diseases or COVID-19.METHODS: A search was performed in the electronic databases of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cinahl through 15 June 2021. Subject heading and keywords were used to reflect the concepts of telemonitoring, telerehabilitation, chronic lung diseases, and COVID-19. Studies that explored the effect of a telerehabilitation and/or telemonitoring intervention, in patients with a chronic lung disease such as asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases (COPD), or COVID-19, and reported the effect of the intervention in one or more of our outcomes of interest were included. Excluding criteria included evaluation of new technological components, teleconsultation or one-time patient assessment.RESULTS: This scoping review included 44 publications reporting the effect of telemonitoring (25 studies), telerehabilitation (8 studies) or both (11 studies) on patients with COPD (35 studies), asthma (5 studies), COPD and asthma (1 study), and COVID-19 (2 studies). Patients who received telemonitoring and/or telerehabilitation had improvements in exercise capacity in 9 out of 11 (82%) articles, better HRQoL in 21 out of 25 (84%), and fewer health care use in 3 out of 3 (100%) articles compared to pre-intervention. Compared to controls, no statistically significant differences were found in the intervention groups' exercise capacity in 5 out 6 (83%) articles, physical activity in 3 out of 3 (100%) articles, HRQoL in 21 out of 25 (84%) articles, and healthcare use in 15 out of 20 (75%) articles. The main limitation of the study was the high variability between the characteristics of the studies, such as the number and age of the patients, the outcome measures, the duration of the intervention, the technological components involved, and the additional elements included in the interventions that may influence the generalization of the results.CONCLUSION: Telemonitoring and telerehabilitation interventions had a positive effect on patient outcomes and appeared to be as effective as standard care. Therefore, they are promising alternatives to support remote home-based rehabilitation in patients with chronic lung diseases or COVID-19.
