Tzu-Hsuan Peng, Janice J Eng, Anne Harris, Catherine Le Cornu Levett, Jennifer Yao, Amy Schneeberg, Courtney L Pollock
{"title":"A survey of the experiences of delivering physiotherapy services through telerehabilitation during the COVID-19 pandemic.","authors":"Tzu-Hsuan Peng, Janice J Eng, Anne Harris, Catherine Le Cornu Levett, Jennifer Yao, Amy Schneeberg, Courtney L Pollock","doi":"10.3389/fresc.2024.1486801","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Physiotherapy services have been typically provided in-person since the profession usually involves a therapist providing hands-on assessment and treatments. The COVID-19 pandemic provided an opportunity to study physiotherapists' adaptation to telerehabilitation (phone or videoconference).</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed: (1) to explore how physiotherapists adapted to the transition to delivering telerehabilitation, (2) to assess physiotherapists' perceptions of implementing telerehabilitation, and (3) to identify the challenges and facilitators of delivering telerehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used an online survey distributed to physiotherapists within a large Canadian health authority. Closed-ended questions were analyzed with descriptive statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventy-five physiotherapists responded and data were collected. Compared prior to the pandemic to time during the pandemic, the use of a phone for delivering physiotherapy increased from 24.0% to 73.3% of physiotherapists while videoconference increased from 5.3% to 77.3%. Overall, the physiotherapists found videoconference to be a more effective delivery method than phone. Less than half felt that they could use videoconference to effectively treat pain (49.3%), upper extremity function (40.0%) or strength/range of motion (48.0%). Only 29.3% felt that they could effectively treat walking balance or mobility by videoconference. Technical barriers were identified with client comfort with the equipment reported by 90.7% of physiotherapists and positioning of the webcam by 76.0% of physiotherapists. A large proportion of physiotherapists agreed that they would continue the practice of telerehabilitation via phone (54.7%) and videoconference (68.0%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The pandemic resulted in a dramatic shift to telerehabilitation for a profession that typically provides hands-on assessments and treatments. While there was increased uptake of telerehabilitation, many physiotherapists questioned their effectiveness using telerehabilitation to undertake activities that traditionally involve manual treatments or hands-on guidance/supervision. However, physiotherapists were committed to continuing telerehabilitation to meet patients' needs after the pandemic.</p>","PeriodicalId":73102,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences","volume":"5 ","pages":"1486801"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11540677/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2024.1486801","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Physiotherapy services have been typically provided in-person since the profession usually involves a therapist providing hands-on assessment and treatments. The COVID-19 pandemic provided an opportunity to study physiotherapists' adaptation to telerehabilitation (phone or videoconference).
Objective: This study aimed: (1) to explore how physiotherapists adapted to the transition to delivering telerehabilitation, (2) to assess physiotherapists' perceptions of implementing telerehabilitation, and (3) to identify the challenges and facilitators of delivering telerehabilitation.
Methods: This study used an online survey distributed to physiotherapists within a large Canadian health authority. Closed-ended questions were analyzed with descriptive statistics.
Results: Seventy-five physiotherapists responded and data were collected. Compared prior to the pandemic to time during the pandemic, the use of a phone for delivering physiotherapy increased from 24.0% to 73.3% of physiotherapists while videoconference increased from 5.3% to 77.3%. Overall, the physiotherapists found videoconference to be a more effective delivery method than phone. Less than half felt that they could use videoconference to effectively treat pain (49.3%), upper extremity function (40.0%) or strength/range of motion (48.0%). Only 29.3% felt that they could effectively treat walking balance or mobility by videoconference. Technical barriers were identified with client comfort with the equipment reported by 90.7% of physiotherapists and positioning of the webcam by 76.0% of physiotherapists. A large proportion of physiotherapists agreed that they would continue the practice of telerehabilitation via phone (54.7%) and videoconference (68.0%).
Conclusion: The pandemic resulted in a dramatic shift to telerehabilitation for a profession that typically provides hands-on assessments and treatments. While there was increased uptake of telerehabilitation, many physiotherapists questioned their effectiveness using telerehabilitation to undertake activities that traditionally involve manual treatments or hands-on guidance/supervision. However, physiotherapists were committed to continuing telerehabilitation to meet patients' needs after the pandemic.