Dataset Information

Impact of a Mobile Telerehabilitation Solution on Metabolic Health Outcomes and Rehabilitation Adherence in Patients With Obesity: Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Obesity is a major public health issue. Combining exercise training, nutrition, and therapeutic education in metabolic rehabilitation (MR) is recommended for obesity management. However, evidence from randomized controlled studies is lacking. In addition, MR is associated with poor patient adherence. Mobile health devices improve access to MR components.

Objective

The aim of this study is to compare the changes in body composition, anthropometric parameters, exercise capacity, and quality of life (QOL) within 12 weeks of patients in the telerehabilitation (TR) program to those of usual care patients with obesity.

Methods

This was a parallel-design randomized controlled study. In total, 50 patients with obesity (BMI>30 kg/m²) were included in a TR group (TRG) or a usual care group (UCG) for 12 weeks. Patients underwent biometric impedance analyses, metabolic exercise tests, actimetry, and QOL and satisfaction questionnaires. The primary outcome was the change in fat mass at 12 weeks from baseline. Secondary outcomes were changes in body weight, metabolic parameters, exercise capacity, QOL, patients' adhesion, and satisfaction.

Results

A total of 49 patients completed the study. No significant group × time interaction was found for fat mass (TRG: mean 1.7 kg, SD 2.6 kg; UCG: mean 1.2 kg, SD 2.4 kg; P=.48). Compared with the UCG, TRG patients tended to significantly improve their waist to hip ratios (TRG: -0.01 kg, SD 0.04; UCG: +0.01 kg, SD 0.06; P=.07) and improved QOL physical impact (TRG: +21.8, SD 43.6; UCG: -1.2, SD 15.4; P=.005). Significant time effects were observed for body composition, 6-minute walk test distance, exercise metabolism, sedentary time, and QOL. Adherence (95%) and satisfaction in the TRG were good.

Conclusions

In adults with obesity, the TR program was not superior to usual care for improving body composition. However, TR was able to deliver full multidisciplinary rehabilitation to patients with obesity and improve some health outcomes. Given the patients' adherence and satisfaction, pragmatic programs should consider mobile health devices to improve access to MR. Further studies are warranted to further establish the benefits that TR has over usual care.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03396666; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03396666.

SUBMITTER: Bughin F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8691412 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStrong evidence supports beginning stroke rehabilitation as soon as the patient's medical status has stabilized and continuing following discharge from acute care. However, adherence to rehabilitation treatments over the rehabilitation phase has been shown to be suboptimal.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to assess the impact of a telerehabilitation platform on stroke patients' adherence to a rehabilitation plan and on their level of reintegration into normal social activities, in comparison with usual care. The primary outcome is patient adherence to stroke rehabilitation (up to 12 weeks), which is hypothesized to influence reintegration into normal living. Secondary outcomes for patients include functional recovery and independence, depression, adverse events related to telerehabilitation, use of services (up to 6 months), perception of interprofessional shared decision making, and quality of services received. Interprofessional collaboration as well as quality of interprofessional shared decision making will be measured with clinicians.MethodsIn this interrupted time series with a convergent qualitative component, rehabilitation teams will be trained to develop rehabilitation treatment plans that engage the patient and family, while taking advantage of a telerehabilitation platform to deliver the treatment. The intervention will be comprised of 220 patients who will take part in stroke telerehabilitation with an interdisciplinary group of clinicians (telerehabilitation group) versus face-to-face standard of care (control group: n=110 patients).ResultsOur Research Ethics Board approved the study in June 2020. Data collection for the control group is underway, with another year planned before we begin the intervention phase.ConclusionsThis study will contribute to the minimization of both knowledge and practice gaps, while producing robust, in-depth data on the factors related to the effectiveness of telerehabilitation in a stroke rehabilitation continuum. Findings will inform best practice guidelines regarding telecare services and the provision of telerehabilitation, including recommendations for effective interdisciplinary collaboration regarding stroke rehabilitation.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04440215; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04440215.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/32134.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Remote virtual rehabilitation aroused growing interest in the last decades, and its role has gained importance following the recent spread of COVID19 pandemic. The advantages of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), gamification, and telerehabilitation have been demonstrated in several medical fields. In this review, we searched the literature for studies using these technologies for orthopedic rehabilitation and analyzed studies' quality, type and field of rehabilitation, patients' characteristics, and outcomes to describe the state of the art of VR, AR, gamification, and telerehabilitation for orthopedic rehabilitation. METHODS:A comprehensive search on PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, and Embase databases was conducted. This review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies published between 2015 and 2020 about remote virtual rehabilitations for orthopedic patients were selected. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) and Cochrane Risk-of-Bias assessment tool were used for quality assessment. RESULTS:24 studies (9 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 15 non-randomized studies) and 2472 patients were included. Studies mainly concern telerehabilitation (56%), and to a lesser extent VR (28%), AR (28%), and gamification (16%). Remote virtual technologies were used following knee and hip arthroplasty. The majority of included patients were between 40 and 60 years old and had a university degree. Remote virtual rehabilitation was not inferior to face-to-face therapy, and physical improvements were demonstrated by increased clinical scores. Orthopedic virtual remote rehabilitation decreased costs related to transports, hospitalizations, and readmissions. CONCLUSION:The heterogeneity of included studies prevented a meta-analysis of their results. Age and social context influence adaptability to technology, and this can modify compliance to treatment and outcomes. A good relationship between patient and physiotherapist is essential for treatment compliance and new technologies are useful to maintain clinical interactions remotely. Remote virtual technologies allow the delivery of high-quality care at reduced costs. This is a necessity given the growing demand for orthopedic rehabilitation and increasing costs related to it. Future studies need to develop specific and objective methods to evaluate the clinical quality of new technologies and definitively demonstrate advantages of VR, AR, gamification, and telerehabilitation compared to face-to face orthopedic rehabilitation.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough it is well known that regular physical activity and exercise, as well as maintaining adequate nutritional status is important to delaying symptom development and maintaining physical capacity and function in people with Parkinson's Disease (PD), many are unable to follow self-management recommendations. Active interventions have shown short-term effects, but there is a need for interventions that facilitate self-management over the course of the disease. Until now, no studies have combined exercise and nutritional interventions with an individual self-management approach in PD. Thus, we aim to examine the effect of a six-month mobile health technology(m-health)-based follow-up programme, focusing on self-management in exercise and nutrition, after an in-service interdisciplinary rehabilitation programme.MethodsA single-blinded, two-group randomised controlled trial. Participants are Adults aged 40 or older, with idiopathic PD, Hoehn and Yahr 1-3, living at home. The intervention group receives a monthly, individualized, digital conversation with a PT, combined with use of an activity tracker. People at nutritional risk get additional digital-follow-up from a nutritional specialist. The control group receives usual care. The primary outcome is physical capacity, measured by 6-min walk test (6MWT). Secondary outcomes are nutritional status, Health related quality of life (HRQOL), physical function and exercise adherence. All measurements are performed at baseline, after 3 months and after 6 months. Sample size, based on primary outcome, is set at 100 participants randomized into the two arms, including an estimated 20% drop out.DiscussionThe increasing prevalence of PD globally makes it even more important to develop evidence-based interventions that can increase motivation to stay active, promote adequate nutritional status and improve self-management in people with PD. The individually tailored digital follow-up programme, based on evidence-based practice, has the potential to promote evidence-based decision-making and to empower people with PD to implement exercise and optimal nutrition in their daily lives and, hopefully, increase adherence to exercise and nutritional recommendations.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04945876). First registration 01.03.2021.

Project description:BackgroundMonitoring the functional status of poststroke patients after they transition home is significant for rehabilitation. Mobile health (mHealth) technologies may provide an opportunity to reach and follow patients post discharge. However, the feasibility and validity of functional assessments administered by mHealth technologies are unknown.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, validity, and reliability of functional assessments administered through the videoconference function of a mobile phone-based app compared with administration through the telephone function in poststroke patients after rehabilitation hospitalization.MethodsA randomized controlled trial was conducted in a rehabilitation hospital in Southeast China. Participants were randomly assigned to either a videoconference follow-up (n=60) or a telephone follow-up (n=60) group. We measured the functional status of participants in each group at 2-week and 3-month follow-up periods. Half the participants in each group were followed by face-to-face home visit assessments as the gold standard. Validity was assessed by comparing any score differences between videoconference follow-up and home visit assessments, as well as telephone follow-up and home visit assessments. Reliability was assessed by computing agreements between videoconference follow-up and home visit assessments, as well as telephone follow-up and home visit assessments. Feasibility was evaluated by the levels of completion, satisfaction, comfort, and confidence in the 2 groups.ResultsScores obtained from the videoconference follow-up were similar to those of the home visit assessment. However, most scores collected from telephone administration were higher than those of the home visit assessment. The agreement between videoconference follow-up and home visit assessments was higher than that between telephone follow-up and home visit assessments at all follow-up periods. In the telephone follow-up group, completion rates were 95% and 82% at 2-week and 3-month follow-up points, respectively. In the videoconference follow-up group, completion rates were 95% and 80% at 2-week and 3-month follow-up points, respectively. There were no differences in the completion rates between the 2 groups at all follow-up periods (X21=1.6, P=.21 for 2-week follow-up; X21=1.9, P=.17 for 3-month follow-up). Patients in the videoconference follow-up group perceived higher confidence than those in the telephone follow-up group at both 2-week and 3-month follow-up periods (X23=6.7, P=.04 for 2-week follow-up; X23=8.0, P=.04 for 3-month follow-up). The videoconference follow-up group demonstrated higher satisfaction than the telephone follow-up group at 3-month follow-up (X23=13.9; P=.03).ConclusionsThe videoconference follow-up assessment of functional status demonstrates higher validity and reliability, as well as higher confidence and satisfaction perceived by patients, than the telephone assessment. The videoconference assessment provides an efficient means of assessing functional outcomes of patients after hospital discharge. This method provides a novel solution for clinical trials requiring longitudinal assessments.Trial registrationchictr.org.cn: ChiCTR1900027626; http://www.chictr.org.cn/edit.aspx?pid=44831&htm=4.

Project description:BackgroundThe postpartum period is a vulnerable time for the pelvic floor. Early implementation of pelvic floor muscle exercises, appropriately termed as pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT), in the postpartum period has been advocated because of its established effectiveness. The popularity of mobile health (mHealth) devices highlights their perceived utility. The effectiveness of various mHealth technologies with claims to support pelvic floor health and fitness is yet to be substantiated through systematic inquiry.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the acceptability, feasibility, and potential effect on outcomes of an mHealth device purposed to facilitate pelvic floor muscle training among postpartum women.MethodsA 16-week mixed methods pilot study was conducted to evaluate outcomes and determine aspects of acceptability and feasibility of an mHealth device. All participants received standardized examination of their pelvic floor muscles and associated instruction on the correct performance of PFMT. Those randomized to the iBall intervention received instructions on its use. Schedules for utilization of the iBall and PFMT were not prescribed, but all participants were informed of the standard established recommendation of PFMT, which includes 3 sets of 10 exercises, 3 to 4 times a week, for the duration of the intervention period. Quantitative data included the measurement of pelvic floor muscle parameters (strength, endurance, and coordination) following the PERFECT assessment scheme: Incontinence Impact Questionnaire scores and the Urogenital Distress Inventory (UDI-6) scores. Aspects of acceptability and feasibility were collected through one-to-one interviews. Interview transcripts were analyzed using Thorne's interpretive description approach.ResultsA total of 23 women with a mean age of 32.2 years were randomized to an intervention group (n=13) or a control group (n=10). Both groups improved on all measures. The only statistically significant change was the UDI-6 score within both groups at 16 weeks compared with baseline. There was no statistically significant difference between the intervention group and control group on any outcomes. Most participants using the iBall (n=10, 77%) indicated value in the concept of the mHealth solution. Technical difficulties (n=10, 77%), a cumbersome initiation process (n=8, 61%), and discomfort from the device (n=8, 61%) were reasons impeding intervention acceptability. Most participants (n=17, 74%) indicated that the initial assessment and training was more useful than the mHealth solution, a tenet that was echoed by all control group participants.ConclusionsOur pilot study demonstrated the potential for mHealth solution-enhanced PFMT in the early postpartum period. Usability issues in hardware and software hindered feasibility and acceptance by the participants. Our findings can inform the redesign of mHealth solutions that may be of value if acceptability and feasibility issues can be overcome.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02865954; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02865954.