RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: To increase people's access to rehabilitation services, particularly in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, we need to explore how the delivery of these services can be adapted. This includes the use of home-based rehabilitation and telerehabilitation. Home-based rehabilitation services may become frequently used options in the recovery process of patients, not only as a solution to accessibility barriers, but as a complement to the usual in-person inpatient rehabilitation provision. Telerehabilitation is also becoming more viable as the usability and availability of communication technologies improve. OBJECTIVES: To identify factors that influence the organisation and delivery of in-person home-based rehabilitation and home-based telerehabilitation for people needing rehabilitation. SEARCH METHODS: We searched PubMed, Global Health, the VHL Regional Portal, Epistemonikos, Health Systems Evidence, and EBM Reviews as well as preprints, regional repositories, and rehabilitation organisations websites for eligible studies, from database inception to search date in June 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included studies that used qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; and that explored patients, caregivers, healthcare providers and other stakeholders' experiences, perceptions and behaviours about the provision of in-person home-based rehabilitation and home-based telerehabilitation services responding to patients' needs in different phases of their health conditions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used a purposive sampling approach and applied maximum variation sampling in a four-step sampling frame. We conducted a framework thematic analysis using the CFIR (Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research) framework as our starting point. We assessed our confidence in the findings using the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 223 studies in the review and sampled 53 of these for our analysis. Forty-five studies were conducted in high-income countries, and eight in low-and middle-income countries. Twenty studies addressed in-person home-based rehabilitation, 28 studies addressed home-based telerehabilitation services, and five studies addressed both modes of delivery. The studies mainly explored the perspectives of healthcare providers, patients with a range of different health conditions, and their informal caregivers and family members. Based on our GRADE-CERQual assessments, we had high confidence in eight of the findings, and moderate confidence in five, indicating that it is highly likely or likely respectively that these findings are a reasonable representation of the phenomenon of interest. There were two findings with low confidence. High and moderate confidence findings Home-based rehabilitation services delivered in-person or through telerehabilitation Patients experience home-based services as convenient and less disruptive of their everyday activities. Patients and providers also suggest that these services can encourage patients' self-management and can make them feel empowered about the rehabilitation process. But patients, family members, and providers describe privacy and confidentiality issues when services are provided at home. These include the increased privacy of being able to exercise at home but also the loss of privacy when one's home life is visible to others. Patients and providers also describe other factors that can affect the success of home-based rehabilitation services. These include support from providers and family members, good communication with providers, the requirements made of patients and their surroundings, and the transition from hospital to home-based services. Telerehabilitation specifically Patients, family members and providers see telerehabilitation as an opportunity to make services more available. But providers point to practical problems when assessing whether patients are performing their exercises correctly. Providers and patients also describe interruptions from family members. In addition, providers complain of a lack of equipment, infrastructure and maintenance and patients refer to usability issues and frustration with digital technology. Providers have different opinions about whether telerehabilitation is cost-efficient for them. But many patients see telerehabilitation as affordable and cost-saving if the equipment and infrastructure have been provided. Patients and providers suggest that telerehabilitation can change the nature of their relationship. For instance, some patients describe how telerehabilitation leads to easier and more relaxed communication. Other patients describe feeling abandoned when receiving telerehabilitation services. Patients, family members and providers call for easy-to-use technologies and more training and support. They also suggest that at least some in-person sessions with the provider are necessary. They feel that telerehabilitation services alone can make it difficult to make meaningful connections. They also explain that some services need the provider's hands. Providers highlight the importance of personalising the services to each person's needs and circumstances. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This synthesis identified several factors that can influence the successful implementation of in-person home-based rehabilitation and telerehabilitation services. These included factors that facilitate implementation, but also factors that can challenge this process. Healthcare providers, program planners and policymakers might benefit from considering these factors when designing and implementing programmes.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Pandemias , Humanos , Familia , Personal de Salud , CuidadoresRESUMEN
Introducción. El dolor lumbar es una de las causas más frecuentes de consulta y discapacidad en pacientes, y según su evolución temporal se puede clasificar como agudo, subagudo y crónico. Objetivo. Estimar en pacientes con Dolor Lumbar Subagudo (DLS), la eficacia de un programa de ejercicio comparado con antiinflamatorios no esteroideos (AINES). Métodos. Se realizó un ensayo clínico controlado aleatorio, con enmascaramiento simple en 90 pacientes y DLS con o sin radiculopatía, 46 pacientes fueron asignados a un programa de ejercicio físico y 44 a tratamiento con AINES. El desenlace primario fue la mejoría del dolor y los secundarios mejoría en la función, calidad de vida, ausentismo laboral y depresión con seguimiento a 1, 3 y 6 meses. Resultados. Al mes, no se registró diferencias en el dolor entre los grupos de 8,16 (IC 95 % -2,19 a 18,51), sin embargo, en el grupo de ejercicios hubo una mejoría de 47,3 (SD: 19,8) a 28,8 (SD: 20,5), p <0,001, y en el grupo de AINES de 45,2 (SD: 22,6) a 34,9 (SD: 25,0), p = 0,018. Otras muestras de mejoría se observaron en la función medida por el Índice de Discapacidad de Oswestry (ODI), la cual mejoró al mes en el grupo de ejercicio (p<0,001), mientras,la función física también mejoró al mes en el grupo de ejercicio (p= 0,038). Otra mejoría se observó en el dolor, función y calidad de vida que se mantuvo a los 3 y 6 meses en ambos grupos. Finalmente, La recurrencia fue mayor en el grupo de AINES: 25,5 % vs. 7,1 % (p= 0,04) al mes; 25,5 % vs. 7,1 % (p= 0,04) y 20,5 % vs. 5 % (p= 0,04), a los 3 y 6 meses. Conclusión. El ejercicio supervisado fue más efectivo que los AINES para disminuir la discapacidad y las recurrencias y mejorar la función física en pacientes con DLS.
Introduction. Low back pain is one of the most frequent causes of consultation and disability in patients, and according to its temporal evolution it can be classified as acute, subacute and chronic. Objective. To estimate the efficacy of an exercise program compared to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients with subacute low back pain (LBP). Methods. A randomized, single-masked, controlled clinical trial was conducted in 90 patients and DLS with or without radiculopathy, 46 patients were assigned to a physical exercise program and 44 to NSAID treatment. The primary outcome was improvement in pain and the secondary outcomes were improvement in function, quality of life, work absenteeism and depression with follow-up at 1, 3 and 6 months. Results. At 1 month, there was no difference in pain between groups of 8.16 (95 % CI -2.19 to 18.51), however, in the exercise group there was an improvement from 47.3 (SD: 19.8) to 28.8 (SD: 20.5), p <0.001, and in the NSAID group from 45.2 (SD: 22.6) to 34.9 (SD: 25.0), p = 0.018. Other signs of improvement were seen in function as measured by the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), which improved at 1 month in the exercise group (p<0.001), while physical function also improved at 1 month in the exercise group (p= 0.038). Another improvement was observed in pain, function and quality of life which was maintained at 3 and 6 months in both groups. Finally, recurrence was higher in the NSAID group: 25.5 % vs. 7.1 % (p= 0.04) at 1 month; 25.5 % (p= 0.04) at 1 month; 25.5 % (p= 0.038) in the exercise group (p= 0.038) at 1 month.
Asunto(s)
HumanosRESUMEN
La pandemia por Coronavirus 2019 (Covid-19) ha profundizado las desigualdades preexistentes de las personas con discapacidad. Los afectados por Covid-19 se encuentran entre los grupos más vulnerables al ser uno de los grupos más excluidos de la sociedad. El objetivo del presente estudio esidentificarlas declaraciones y recomendaciones que las organizaciones supranacionales han emitido para garantizar los derechos de las personas con discapacidad en la actual pandemia. Se realizó una búsqueda amplia y sistemática; fueron consultadas 20 organizaciones y analizados 58 documentos en esta síntesis rápida. Los documentos encontrados fueron asignados en cuatro categorías dependiendo de su enfoque principal: principio de igualdad y no discriminación (25,8%), derecho al respeto de la dignidad inherente (10,3%), derecho a la accesibilidad (36,2%) y derecho a la salud (27,6%). Las organizaciones supranacionales hacen un llamado a los gobiernos a garantizar la protección y promoción de los derechos de las personas con discapacidad y a implementar medidas y estrategias razonables que aborden las necesidades especiales de esta población en la actual pandemia.
The Coronavirus 2019 (Covid-19) pandemic has deepened pre-existing inequalities for people with disabilities. Those affected by Covid-19 are among the most vulnerable groups as one of the most excluded groups in society. The objective of this study is to identify the declarations and recommendations that supranational organizations have issued to guarantee the rights of persons with disabilities in the current pandemic. A broad and systematic search was carried out; 20 organizations were consulted and 58 documents were analyzed in this rapid synthesis. The documents found were assigned into four categories depending on their main focus: principle of equality and non-discrimination (25.8%), right to respect for inherent dignity (10.3%), right to accessibility (36.2%) and right to health (27.6%). The supranational organizations call on governments to ensure the protection and promotion of the rights of persons with disabilities and to implement reasonable measures and strategies to address the special needs of this population in the current pandemic.
