Sabine Lang, Colin McLelland, Donnie MacDonald, David F Hamilton
{"title":"数字干预是否增加了家庭运动康复的依从性?随机对照试验的系统综述。","authors":"Sabine Lang, Colin McLelland, Donnie MacDonald, David F Hamilton","doi":"10.1186/s40945-022-00148-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Home exercise regimes are a well-utilised rehabilitation intervention for many conditions; however, adherence to prescribed programmes remains low. Digital interventions are recommended as an adjunct to face-to-face interventions by the National Health Service in the UK and may offer increased exercise adherence, however the evidence for this is conflicting.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A systematic review was undertaken using MEDLINE and CINAHL databases using the PRISMA guidelines. Randomised controlled trials in any clinical population evaluating the adherence to prescribed home exercise interventions with and without additional digital interventions were included. Publication quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search strategy returned a total of 1336 articles, of which 10 randomised controlled trials containing data for 1117 participants were eligible for inclusion. 565 participants were randomised to receive the interventions, and 552 to the control. Seven of the ten trials reported a significant difference in adherence between the control and intervention groups favouring an additional digital intervention. Three trials reported equivalent findings. These three reported longer-term outcomes, suggesting an interaction between adherence and duration of intervention. There was substantial heterogeneity in outcome assessment metrics used across the trials prohibiting formal meta-analysis. This included studies were of low to moderate quality in terms of risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The addition of a digital interventions to prescribed home exercise programmes can likely increase exercise adherence in the short term, with longer term effects less certain.</p>","PeriodicalId":72290,"journal":{"name":"Archives of physiotherapy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9527092/pdf/","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do digital interventions increase adherence to home exercise rehabilitation? A systematic review of randomised controlled trials.\",\"authors\":\"Sabine Lang, Colin McLelland, Donnie MacDonald, David F Hamilton\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40945-022-00148-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Home exercise regimes are a well-utilised rehabilitation intervention for many conditions; however, adherence to prescribed programmes remains low. Digital interventions are recommended as an adjunct to face-to-face interventions by the National Health Service in the UK and may offer increased exercise adherence, however the evidence for this is conflicting.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A systematic review was undertaken using MEDLINE and CINAHL databases using the PRISMA guidelines. Randomised controlled trials in any clinical population evaluating the adherence to prescribed home exercise interventions with and without additional digital interventions were included. Publication quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search strategy returned a total of 1336 articles, of which 10 randomised controlled trials containing data for 1117 participants were eligible for inclusion. 565 participants were randomised to receive the interventions, and 552 to the control. Seven of the ten trials reported a significant difference in adherence between the control and intervention groups favouring an additional digital intervention. Three trials reported equivalent findings. These three reported longer-term outcomes, suggesting an interaction between adherence and duration of intervention. There was substantial heterogeneity in outcome assessment metrics used across the trials prohibiting formal meta-analysis. This included studies were of low to moderate quality in terms of risk of bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The addition of a digital interventions to prescribed home exercise programmes can likely increase exercise adherence in the short term, with longer term effects less certain.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72290,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of physiotherapy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9527092/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of physiotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-022-00148-z\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40945-022-00148-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11
摘要
背景:家庭锻炼制度是一种很好的康复干预措施,用于许多条件;然而,遵守规定方案的情况仍然很低。英国国家卫生服务机构(National Health Service)建议将数字干预作为面对面干预的辅助手段,并可能提高锻炼的依从性,然而,这方面的证据是相互矛盾的。方法:采用MEDLINE和CINAHL数据库,采用PRISMA指南进行系统评价。在任何临床人群中进行随机对照试验,评估有或没有额外的数字干预对规定的家庭锻炼干预的依从性。使用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估出版物质量。结果:检索策略共返回1336篇文章,其中10篇随机对照试验包含1117名受试者的数据符合纳入条件。565名参与者被随机分配到干预组,552人被随机分配到对照组。10项试验中有7项报告了对照组和干预组之间支持额外数字干预的依从性的显着差异。三个试验报告了相同的结果。这三个报告了较长期的结果,表明依从性和干预持续时间之间存在相互作用。在禁止正式荟萃分析的试验中使用的结果评估指标存在实质性的异质性。这包括低到中等偏倚风险的研究。结论:在规定的家庭锻炼计划中增加数字干预可能会在短期内增加锻炼依从性,但长期效果不太确定。
Do digital interventions increase adherence to home exercise rehabilitation? A systematic review of randomised controlled trials.
Background: Home exercise regimes are a well-utilised rehabilitation intervention for many conditions; however, adherence to prescribed programmes remains low. Digital interventions are recommended as an adjunct to face-to-face interventions by the National Health Service in the UK and may offer increased exercise adherence, however the evidence for this is conflicting.
Method: A systematic review was undertaken using MEDLINE and CINAHL databases using the PRISMA guidelines. Randomised controlled trials in any clinical population evaluating the adherence to prescribed home exercise interventions with and without additional digital interventions were included. Publication quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool.
Results: The search strategy returned a total of 1336 articles, of which 10 randomised controlled trials containing data for 1117 participants were eligible for inclusion. 565 participants were randomised to receive the interventions, and 552 to the control. Seven of the ten trials reported a significant difference in adherence between the control and intervention groups favouring an additional digital intervention. Three trials reported equivalent findings. These three reported longer-term outcomes, suggesting an interaction between adherence and duration of intervention. There was substantial heterogeneity in outcome assessment metrics used across the trials prohibiting formal meta-analysis. This included studies were of low to moderate quality in terms of risk of bias.
Conclusion: The addition of a digital interventions to prescribed home exercise programmes can likely increase exercise adherence in the short term, with longer term effects less certain.