Cargando…

Digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: This systematic review aimed to assess the certainty of evidence for digital versus conventional, face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of musculoskeletal disorders, concerning validity, reliability, feasibility, patient satisfaction, physiotherapist satisfaction, adverse events, clinica...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bernhardsson, Susanne, Larsson, Anette, Bergenheim, Anna, Ho-Henriksson, Chan-Mei, Ekhammar, Annika, Lange, Elvira, Larsson, Maria E. H., Nordeman, Lena, Samsson, Karin S., Bornhöft, Lena
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10030027/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36943857
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283013
_version_ 1784910269556719616
author Bernhardsson, Susanne
Larsson, Anette
Bergenheim, Anna
Ho-Henriksson, Chan-Mei
Ekhammar, Annika
Lange, Elvira
Larsson, Maria E. H.
Nordeman, Lena
Samsson, Karin S.
Bornhöft, Lena
author_facet Bernhardsson, Susanne
Larsson, Anette
Bergenheim, Anna
Ho-Henriksson, Chan-Mei
Ekhammar, Annika
Lange, Elvira
Larsson, Maria E. H.
Nordeman, Lena
Samsson, Karin S.
Bornhöft, Lena
author_sort Bernhardsson, Susanne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: This systematic review aimed to assess the certainty of evidence for digital versus conventional, face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of musculoskeletal disorders, concerning validity, reliability, feasibility, patient satisfaction, physiotherapist satisfaction, adverse events, clinical management, and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Eligibility criteria: Original studies comparing digital physiotherapy assessment with face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of musculoskeletal disorders. Systematic database searches were performed in May 2021, and updated in May 2022, in Medline, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, AMED, and PEDro. Risk of bias and applicability of the included studies were appraised using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool and the Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies tool. Included studies were synthesised narratively. Certainty of evidence was evaluated for each assessment component using GRADE. RESULTS: Ten repeated-measures studies were included, involving 193 participants aged 23–62 years. Reported validity of digital physiotherapy assessment ranged from moderate/acceptable to almost perfect/excellent for clinical tests, range of motion, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), pain, neck posture, and management decisions. Reported validity for assessing spinal posture varied and was for clinical observations unacceptably low. Reported validity and reliability for digital diagnosis ranged from moderate to almost perfect for exact+similar agreement, but was considerably lower when constrained to exact agreement. Reported reliability was excellent for digital assessment of clinical tests, range of motion, pain, neck posture, and PROMs. Certainty of evidence varied from very low to high, with PROMs and pain assessment obtaining the highest certainty. Patients were satisfied with their digital assessment, but did not perceive it as good as face-to-face assessment. DISCUSSION: Evidence ranging from very low to high certainty suggests that validity and reliability of digital physiotherapy assessments are acceptable to excellent for several assessment components. Digital physiotherapy assessment may be a viable alternative to face-to-face assessment for patients who are likely to benefit from the accessibility and convenience of remote access. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The review was registered in the PROSPERO database, CRD42021277624.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10030027
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100300272023-03-22 Digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review Bernhardsson, Susanne Larsson, Anette Bergenheim, Anna Ho-Henriksson, Chan-Mei Ekhammar, Annika Lange, Elvira Larsson, Maria E. H. Nordeman, Lena Samsson, Karin S. Bornhöft, Lena PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: This systematic review aimed to assess the certainty of evidence for digital versus conventional, face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of musculoskeletal disorders, concerning validity, reliability, feasibility, patient satisfaction, physiotherapist satisfaction, adverse events, clinical management, and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Eligibility criteria: Original studies comparing digital physiotherapy assessment with face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of musculoskeletal disorders. Systematic database searches were performed in May 2021, and updated in May 2022, in Medline, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, AMED, and PEDro. Risk of bias and applicability of the included studies were appraised using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool and the Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies tool. Included studies were synthesised narratively. Certainty of evidence was evaluated for each assessment component using GRADE. RESULTS: Ten repeated-measures studies were included, involving 193 participants aged 23–62 years. Reported validity of digital physiotherapy assessment ranged from moderate/acceptable to almost perfect/excellent for clinical tests, range of motion, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), pain, neck posture, and management decisions. Reported validity for assessing spinal posture varied and was for clinical observations unacceptably low. Reported validity and reliability for digital diagnosis ranged from moderate to almost perfect for exact+similar agreement, but was considerably lower when constrained to exact agreement. Reported reliability was excellent for digital assessment of clinical tests, range of motion, pain, neck posture, and PROMs. Certainty of evidence varied from very low to high, with PROMs and pain assessment obtaining the highest certainty. Patients were satisfied with their digital assessment, but did not perceive it as good as face-to-face assessment. DISCUSSION: Evidence ranging from very low to high certainty suggests that validity and reliability of digital physiotherapy assessments are acceptable to excellent for several assessment components. Digital physiotherapy assessment may be a viable alternative to face-to-face assessment for patients who are likely to benefit from the accessibility and convenience of remote access. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The review was registered in the PROSPERO database, CRD42021277624. Public Library of Science 2023-03-21 /pmc/articles/PMC10030027/ /pubmed/36943857 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283013 Text en © 2023 Bernhardsson et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Bernhardsson, Susanne
Larsson, Anette
Bergenheim, Anna
Ho-Henriksson, Chan-Mei
Ekhammar, Annika
Lange, Elvira
Larsson, Maria E. H.
Nordeman, Lena
Samsson, Karin S.
Bornhöft, Lena
Digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review
title Digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review
title_full Digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review
title_fullStr Digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review
title_short Digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review
title_sort digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10030027/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36943857
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0283013
work_keys_str_mv AT bernhardssonsusanne digitalphysiotherapyassessmentvsconventionalfacetofacephysiotherapyassessmentofpatientswithmusculoskeletaldisordersasystematicreview
AT larssonanette digitalphysiotherapyassessmentvsconventionalfacetofacephysiotherapyassessmentofpatientswithmusculoskeletaldisordersasystematicreview
AT bergenheimanna digitalphysiotherapyassessmentvsconventionalfacetofacephysiotherapyassessmentofpatientswithmusculoskeletaldisordersasystematicreview
AT hohenrikssonchanmei digitalphysiotherapyassessmentvsconventionalfacetofacephysiotherapyassessmentofpatientswithmusculoskeletaldisordersasystematicreview
AT ekhammarannika digitalphysiotherapyassessmentvsconventionalfacetofacephysiotherapyassessmentofpatientswithmusculoskeletaldisordersasystematicreview
AT langeelvira digitalphysiotherapyassessmentvsconventionalfacetofacephysiotherapyassessmentofpatientswithmusculoskeletaldisordersasystematicreview
AT larssonmariaeh digitalphysiotherapyassessmentvsconventionalfacetofacephysiotherapyassessmentofpatientswithmusculoskeletaldisordersasystematicreview
AT nordemanlena digitalphysiotherapyassessmentvsconventionalfacetofacephysiotherapyassessmentofpatientswithmusculoskeletaldisordersasystematicreview
AT samssonkarins digitalphysiotherapyassessmentvsconventionalfacetofacephysiotherapyassessmentofpatientswithmusculoskeletaldisordersasystematicreview
AT bornhoftlena digitalphysiotherapyassessmentvsconventionalfacetofacephysiotherapyassessmentofpatientswithmusculoskeletaldisordersasystematicreview