A Brief Intervention to Support Implementation of Telerehabilitation by Community Rehabilitation Services During COVID-19: A Feasibility Study.
Narelle S Cox, Katharine Scrivener, Anne E Holland and 5 others
PMID 33417964WHAT IT FOUND
After the combined six-week remote support program, more than half of client consultations were via telerehabilitation, but clinicians' perceived barriers did not change.
Key findings
01At the conclusion of the 6-week brief intervention, 58% of client consultations were taking place via telerehabilitation.
02After the 6-week program, 54% reported using telerehabilitation for assessment and monitoring, compared with 10% previously; 27% reported using it for therapy sessions, compared with 7% previously; and 12% reported using it for group programs, compared with 3% previously.
03Clinician questionnaire responses about barriers and enablers did not change at the end of the intervention.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 31 clinicians completed the baseline questionnaire and 26 completed the follow-up questionnaire. The clinicians came from private practices in three Australian cities and were mostly physiotherapists, so results may not apply to other settings or professions. The same clinicians were measured before and after the program, so pandemic service pressures and the program cannot be separated. The program combined weekly videoconferencing education, recorded sessions, a resource repository, and clinician superuser accounts, so the contribution of any single component cannot be separated. The outcome was self-reported clinician questionnaire and practice use, not patient outcomes or measured competence in assessing patient and environment safety. The intervention was brief and delivered during early COVID-19 restrictions, so sustainability and general effect are unclear. Patient internet access, interest, skills, and safety were not assessed.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the increase in telerehabilitation use as proof that clinicians' perceived barriers improved. The questionnaire responses did not change, and the same clinicians were measured before and after the program, so pandemic service pressures cannot be separated from the program.