Coralie English1,2, Maria Gabriella Ceravolo3, Simone Dorsch4,5, Avril Drummond6, Dorcas Bc Gandhi7, Judith Halliday Green8, Ben Schelfaut9, Paul Verschure10,11, Gerard Urimubenshi12, Sean Savitz13. 1. School of Health Sciences and Priority Research Centre for Stroke and Brain Injury, The University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia. 2. Centre for Research Excellence in Stroke Rehabilitation and Brain Recovery, Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Hunter Medical Research Institute, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia. 3. Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Università Politecnica delle March, Ancona, Italy. 4. Faculty of Health Sciences, Australian Catholic University, North Sydney, NSW, Australia. 5. The StrokeEd Collaboration, Ashfield, NSW, Australia. 6. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK. 7. College of Physiotherapy and Department of Neurology, Christian Medical College & Hospital, Ludhiana, India. 8. Stroke Foundation, Melbourne, VIC, Australia. 9. Stroke Survivor, UK. 10. SPECS-lab, Institute for Bioengineering of Catalonia (IBEC), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain. 11. Institució Catalana de la Recerca i Estudis Avançats, Barcelona, Spain. 12. Department of Physiotherapy, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Rwanda, Kigali, Rwanda. 13. Institute for Stroke and Cerebrovascular Disease, The University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: The aim of this rapid review and opinion paper is to present the state of the current evidence and present future directions for telehealth research and clinical service delivery for stroke rehabilitation. METHODS: We conducted a rapid review of published trials in the field. We searched Medline using key terms related to stroke rehabilitation and telehealth or virtual care. We also searched clinical trial registers to identify key ongoing trials. RESULTS: The evidence for telehealth to deliver stroke rehabilitation interventions is not strong and is predominantly based on small trials prone to Type 2 error. To move the field forward, we need to progress to trials of implementation that include measures of adoption and reach, as well as effectiveness. We also need to understand which outcome measures can be reliably measured remotely, and/or develop new ones. We present tools to assist with the deployment of telehealth for rehabilitation after stroke. CONCLUSION: The current, and likely long-term, pandemic means that we cannot wait for stronger evidence before implementing telehealth. As a research and clinical community, we owe it to people living with stroke internationally to investigate the best possible telehealth solutions for providing the highest quality rehabilitation.
AIMS: The aim of this rapid review and opinion paper is to present the state of the current evidence and present future directions for telehealth research and clinical service delivery for stroke rehabilitation. METHODS: We conducted a rapid review of published trials in the field. We searched Medline using key terms related to stroke rehabilitation and telehealth or virtual care. We also searched clinical trial registers to identify key ongoing trials. RESULTS: The evidence for telehealth to deliver stroke rehabilitation interventions is not strong and is predominantly based on small trials prone to Type 2 error. To move the field forward, we need to progress to trials of implementation that include measures of adoption and reach, as well as effectiveness. We also need to understand which outcome measures can be reliably measured remotely, and/or develop new ones. We present tools to assist with the deployment of telehealth for rehabilitation after stroke. CONCLUSION: The current, and likely long-term, pandemic means that we cannot wait for stronger evidence before implementing telehealth. As a research and clinical community, we owe it to people living with stroke internationally to investigate the best possible telehealth solutions for providing the highest quality rehabilitation.
Entities:
Keywords:
Telehealth; rehabilitation; virtual care
Authors: Anna Mura; Martina Maier; Belén Rubio Ballester; Javier De la Torre Costa; Judit López-Luque; Axelle Gelineau; Stephane Mandigout; Per Hamid Ghatan; Raffaele Fiorillo; Fabrizio Antenucci; Ton Coolen; Iñigo Chivite; Antonio Callen; Hugo Landais; Olga Irina Gómez; Cristina Melero; Santiago Brandi; Marc Domenech; Jean-Christophe Daviet; Riccardo Zucca; Paul F M J Verschure Journal: Trials Date: 2022-06-20 Impact factor: 2.728
Authors: Marie-Louise Bird; Felix Peel; Matt Schmidt; Natalie A Fini; Emily Ramage; Brodie M Sakakibara; Dawn B Simpson; Carey Mather; Dominique A Cadilhac; Kiran D K Ahuja; Heather Bridgman; Coralie English Journal: JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol Date: 2022-08-22