Journal
TELEMEDICINE AND E-HEALTH
Volume 27, Issue 3, Pages 239-246Publisher
MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/tmj.2020.0019
Keywords
stroke; telerehabilitation; telemedicine; teleneurology; neurology; rehabilitation; virtual reality; robotic; physical therapy; e-health; telehealth
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Telerehabilitation (TR) is a promising modality to reduce costs, improve accessibility, and retain patient independence in stroke rehabilitation. Studies show that TR can be as effective as traditional in-person therapy in improving functional outcomes in stroke patients. Home-based robotic therapy and virtual reality are cost-effective options for stroke rehabilitation.
Background: Stroke is the leading cause of serious long-term disability in the United States. Barriers to rehabilitation include cost, transportation, lack of trained personnel, and equipment. Telerehabilitation (TR) has emerged as a promising modality to reduce costs, improve accessibility, and retain patient independence. TR allows providers to remotely administer therapy, potentially increasing access to underserved regions. Objectives: To describe types of stroke rehabilitation therapy delivered through TR and to evaluate whether TR is as effective as traditional in-person outpatient therapy in improving satisfaction and poststroke residual deficits such as motor function, speech, and disability. Methods: A literature search of the term telerehabilitation and stroke was conducted across three databases. Full-text articles with results pertaining to TR interventions were reviewed. Articles were scored for methodological quality using the PEDro scale. Results: Thirty-four articles with 1,025 patients were included. Types of TR included speech therapy, virtual reality (VR), robotic, community-based, goal setting, and motor training exercises. Frequently measured outcomes included motor function, speech, disability, and satisfaction. All 34 studies reported improvement from baseline after TR therapy. PEDro scores ranged from 2 to 8 with a mean of 4.59 +/- 1.94 (on a scale of 0-10). Studies with control interventions, randomized allocation, and blinded assessment had significantly higher PEDro scores. All 15 studies that compared TR with traditional therapy showed equivalent or better functional outcomes. Home-based robotic therapy and VR were less costly than in-person therapy. Patient satisfaction with TR and in-person clinical therapy was similar. Conclusions: TR is less costly and equally as effective as clinic-based rehabilitation at improving functional outcomes in stroke patients. TR produces similar patient satisfaction. TR can be combined with other therapies, including VR, speech, and robotic assistance, or used as an adjuvant to direct in-person care.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available