Effectiveness of Telerehabilitation in Physical Therapy: A Rapid Overview.
Pamela Seron, María-Jose Oliveros, Ruvistay Gutierrez-Arias and 16 others
PMID 33561280WHAT IT FOUND
Telerehabilitation often matches in-person physical therapy for musculoskeletal pain and function, but results are inconsistent across neurological and cardiopulmonary conditions.
Many included reviews had high risk of bias, so evidence for superiority is weak. It is a viable alternative when access is limited.
Key findings
01For musculoskeletal conditions, telerehabilitation showed comparable or better results for pain and function in several reviews, though many comparisons against in-person care found no difference.
02In neurorehabilitation, evidence for stroke is unclear, but some reviews suggest benefits for balance and physical activity in multiple sclerosis.
03Cardiopulmonary results are mixed; one low-bias review suggested lower mortality with telerehabilitation, but others found no difference in clinical effectiveness or quality of life.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
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 17 of the 53 included systematic reviews were assessed as having a low risk of bias; the majority had high or unclear risk. It was conducted as a rapid review, meaning grey literature was not searched and data extraction was not performed in duplicate. Most primary studies were from Europe, North America, and Oceania, limiting applicability to low-resource settings. Physical therapy was often delivered as part of a broader multidisciplinary program, making it difficult to isolate the specific contribution of the physical therapist's remote intervention.
Declared interests
The study was funded by the Fondecyt Program of National Agency for Research and Development (ANID). The funder played no role in the design, conduct, or reporting of the study.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the positive findings for specific conditions as proof that telerehabilitation is superior to in-person care. Many of the reviews showing benefit had high risk of bias, and the majority of comparisons against in-person care showed no significant difference.