The Era of Technology in Healthcare-An Evaluation of Telerehabilitation on Client Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

The quality of evidence was rated very low to low, primarily due to high heterogeneity between studies and a lack of blinding. Many included studies had small sample sizes, which increases the risk of false positives and reduces the reliability of the pooled results. Long-term follow-up data were incomplete in many studies, so the sustained effects of telerehabilitation are unknown. The review focused only on employed adults absent from work, so findings may not apply to children, elderly patients, or those not in the workforce.

No specific funding sources or conflicts of interest were declared in the provided text.

Do not interpret the lack of significant difference as proof that telerehabilitation is equally effective as face-to-face care. The very low certainty of evidence and high variability between studies mean that a true difference could exist but was not detected. This paper does not support replacing in-person therapy with remote care based on efficacy.