Factors that influence the provision of home-based rehabilitation services for people needing rehabilitation: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

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.

Cognitive impairment, anxiety and depression: a map of Cochrane evidence relevant to rehabilitation for people with post COVID-19 condition.

INTRODUCTION: Currently, no evidence exists on specific treatments for post COVID-19 condition (PCC). However, rehabilitation interventions that are effective for similar symptoms in other health conditions could be applied to people with PCC. With this overview of systematic reviews with mapping, we aimed to describe the Cochrane evidence on rehabilitation interventions proposed for cognitive impairment, anxiety and depression in different health conditions that can be relevant for PCC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched the last five years' Cochrane Systematic Review (CSRs) using the terms "cognitive impairment," "depressive disorder," "anxiety disorder," their synonyms and variants, and "rehabilitation" in the Cochrane Library. We extracted and summarized the available evidence using a map. We grouped the included CSRs for health conditions and interventions, indicating the effect and the quality of evidence. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We found 3596 CSRs published between 2016 and 2021, and we included 17 on cognitive impairment and 37 on anxiety and depression. For cognitive impairment, we found 7 CSRs on participants with stroke, 3 with cancer, 2 with Parkinson's disease, and one each for five other health conditions. Each intervention improved a different domain, and included exercises, cognitive and attention-specific training, and computerized cognition-based training (from very low to high-quality evidence). For anxiety and depression, we found 10 CSRs including participants with cancer, 8 with stroke, 3 with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 2 or 1 each in 11 other health conditions. Exercise training, physical activity and yoga resulted effective in several pathologies (very low- to moderate-quality evidence). In specific diseases, we found effective acupuncture, animal-assisted therapy, aromatherapy, educational programs, home-based multidimensional survivorship programs, manual acupressure massage, memory rehabilitation, non-invasive brain stimulation, pulmonary rehabilitation, and telerehabilitation (very low- to moderate-quality evidence). CONCLUSIONS: These results are the first step of indirect evidence able to generate helpful hypotheses for clinical practice and future research. They served as the basis for the three recommendations on treatments for these PCC symptoms published in the current WHO Guidelines for clinical practice.

Dyspnea: a map of Cochrane evidence relevant to rehabilitation for people with post COVID-19 condition.

INTRODUCTION: Rehabilitation focuses on impairments, activity limitations and participation restrictions being informed by the underlying health condition. In the current absence of direct "evidence on" rehabilitation interventions for people with post COVID-19 condition (PCC), we can search and synthesize the indirect "evidence relevant to" coming from interventions effective on the symptoms of PCC in other health conditions. The World Health Organization (WHO) required this information to inform expert teams and provide specific recommendations in their Guidelines. With this overview of reviews with mapping we aimed to synthesize in a map the Cochrane evidence relevant to rehabilitation for dyspnea due to PCC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched the last five years' Cochrane Systematic Review (CSRs) using the terms "dyspnea" and its synonyms in the Cochrane Library. We extracted and summarized all the available evidence using a map. We grouped the included CSRs for health conditions and interventions, indicating the effect and the quality of evidence. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We found 371 CSRs published between 2016 and 2021 and included 15 in this overview. We found eight studies on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, two on cancer, and one for bronchiectasis, chronic respiratory disease, cystic fibrosis, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and interstitial lung disease. Effective interventions included pulmonary rehabilitation, also in combination with exercise training, non-invasive ventilation, upper limb training and multicomponent integrated interventions, with very low- to moderate-quality evidence. CONCLUSIONS: These results are the first step of indirect evidence to generate helpful hypotheses for clinical practice and future research on dyspnea in adults with PCC. They served as the basis for one recommendation on treatments for dyspnea as a PCC symptom published in the current WHO Guidelines for clinical practice.

Scoping review of rehabilitation care models for post COVID-19 condition.

Objective: To systematically map the current evidence about the characteristics of health systems, providers and patients to design rehabilitation care for post coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) condition. Methods: We conducted a scoping review by searching the databases: MEDLINE®, Embase®, Web of Science, Cochrane COVID-19 Registry and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception to 22 April 2022. The search strategy included terms related to (i) post COVID-19 condition and other currently known terminologies; (ii) care models and pathways; and (iii) rehabilitation. We applied no language or study design restrictions. Two pairs of researchers independently screened title, abstracts and full-text articles and extracted data. We charted the evidence according to five topics: (i) care model components and functions; (ii) safe delivery of rehabilitation; (iii) referral principles; (iv) service delivery settings; and (v) health-care professionals. Findings: We screened 13 753 titles and abstracts, read 154 full-text articles, and included 37 articles. The current evidence is conceptual and expert based. Care model components included multidisciplinary teams, continuity or coordination of care, people-centred care and shared decision-making between clinicians and patients. Care model functions included standardized symptoms assessment, telehealth and virtual care and follow-up system. Rehabilitation services were integrated at all levels of a health system from primary care to tertiary hospital-based care. Health-care workers delivering services within a multidisciplinary team included mostly physiotherapists, occupational therapists and psychologists. Conclusion: Key policy messages include implementing a multilevel and multiprofessional model; leveraging country health systems' strengths and learning from other conditions; financing rehabilitation research providing standardized outcomes; and guidance to increase patient safety.

Arthralgia: a map of Cochrane evidence relevant to rehabilitation for people with post-COVID-19 condition.

INTRODUCTION: Rehabilitation focuses on impairments, activity limitations and participation restrictions being informed by the underlying health condition. In the current absence of direct "evidence on" rehabilitation interventions for people with post-COVID-19 condition (PCC), we can search and synthesize the indirect "evidence relevant to" coming from interventions effective on the symptoms of PCC in other health conditions. The World Health Organization (WHO) required this information to inform expert teams and provide specific recommendations in its Guidelines. With this overview of reviews with mapping we aimed to synthesize the Cochrane evidence relevant to rehabilitation for arthralgia due to PCC in a map. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched the last five years' Cochrane Systematic Review (CSRs) using the terms "arthralgia," "joint pain," and "rehabilitation" and their synonyms in the Cochrane Library. We extracted and summarized all the available evidence using a map. We grouped the included CSRs for health conditions and interventions, indicating the effect and the quality of evidence. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We found 200 CSRs published between 2016 and 2021, and included 11 in this overview. They provided data from 7 health conditions, with osteoarthritis (5 studies) being the most studied. Effective rehabilitation interventions included exercise training, transcranial magnetic stimulation, different types of electrical stimulation and Tai chi. The overall quality of evidence was mainly low to very low, and moderate in a few cases. CONCLUSIONS: These results provided the requested information to the WHO and served as the basis for one recommendation on treatments for arthralgia due to PCC in the current Guidelines for clinical practice. These results should be interpreted as a first step of indirect evidence able to generate helpful hypotheses for future research.

Fatigue, post-exertional malaise and orthostatic intolerance: a map of Cochrane evidence relevant to rehabilitation for people with post COVID-19 condition.

INTRODUCTION: Rehabilitation focuses on impairments, activity limitations and participation restrictions being informed by the underlying health condition. In the current absence of direct "evidence on" rehabilitation interventions for people with post-COVID-19 condition (PCC), we can search and synthesize the indirect "evidence relevant to" coming from interventions effective for the symptoms of PCC in other health conditions. The World Health Organization (WHO) required this information to inform expert teams and provide specific recommendations in their Guidelines. With this overview of reviews with mapping, we aimed to synthesize in a map the Cochrane evidence relevant to rehabilitation for fatigue, post-exertional malaise and orthostatic intolerance due to PCC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched the last five years' Cochrane Systematic Review (CSRs) using the terms "fatigue," "orthostatic intolerance," "rehabilitation" and their synonyms in the Cochrane Library. We extracted and summarized the available evidence using a map. We grouped the included CSRs for health conditions and interventions, indicating the effect and the quality of evidence. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Out of 1397 CSRs published between 2016 and 2021, we included 32 for fatigue and 4 for exercise intolerance. They provided data from 13 health conditions, with cancer (11 studies), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (7 studies), fibromyalgia (4 studies), and cystic fibrosis (3 studies) being the most studied. Effective interventions for fatigue included exercise training and physical activities, telerehabilitation and multicomponent and educational interventions. Effective interventions for exercise intolerance included combined aerobic/anaerobic training and integrated disease rehabilitation management. The overall quality of evidence was low to very low and moderate in very few cases. We did not identify CSRs that specifically addressed post-exertional malaise or orthostatic intolerance. CONCLUSIONS: These results are the first step of indirect evidence able to generate helpful hypotheses for clinical practice and future research. They served as the basis for the three recommendations on treatments for these PCC symptoms published in the current WHO Guidelines for clinical practice.

Cochrane "evidence relevant to" rehabilitation of people with post COVID-19 condition. What it is and how it has been mapped to inform the development of the World Health Organization recommendations.

Cochrane Rehabilitation developed a series of actions to provide the global rehabilitation community with the best available evidence to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic. These initiatives constituted the REH-COVER (Rehabilitation COVID-19 evidence-based response) action. In March 2020, the first initiative started in agreement with the European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EJPRM): the rapid systematic review of all papers relevant to COVID-19 rehabilitation to inform rehabilitation health professionals rapidly. Currently, we are facing the long-term consequences of COVID-19, initially called "long Covid" and now named post COVID-19 condition (PCC), which led to the request by the WHO Rehabilitation Programme for evidence synthesis to support the development of specific recommendations. Cochrane Rehabilitation provided the best available evidence from the REH-COVER rapid living systematic review results, a systematic scoping review on the models of care and a summary of "evidence relevant to" the rehabilitation for adults with PCC. Based on this evidence, expert groups developed the 16 recommendations for the rehabilitation of adults with PCC recently published in Chapter 24 of the WHO "Clinical management of COVID-19 living guideline." This paper aims to introduce the Special Section of EJPRM reporting the work performed by Cochrane Rehabilitation to produce a summary of the existing "evidence relevant to" the rehabilitation of adults with PCC. The paper reports the methodology (overview of systematic reviews with mapping) and introduces the concept of "evidence relevant to" rehabilitation.

Scoping review of rehabilitation care models for post COVID-19 condition Analyse exploratoire des modèles de réadaptation pour les affections post-COVID-19 Revisión exploratoria de los modelos de atención de rehabilitación para la afección posterior a la COVID-19 مراجعة نطاق نماذج الرعاية التأهيلية في الحالات الصحية اللاحقة لكوفيد 19 新型冠状病毒肺炎大流行后时代康复护理模型的范围审查 Обзорный анализ моделей реабилитационной помощи при постковидном синдроме

Objective To systematically map the current evidence about the characteristics of health systems, providers and patients to design rehabilitation care for post coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) condition. Methods We conducted a scoping review by searching the databases: MEDLINE®, Embase®, Web of Science, Cochrane COVID-19 Registry and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, from inception to 22 April 2022. The search strategy included terms related to (i) post COVID-19 condition and other currently known terminologies;(ii) care models and pathways;and (iii) rehabilitation. We applied no language or study design restrictions. Two pairs of researchers independently screened title, s and full-text articles and extracted data. We charted the evidence according to five topics: (i) care model components and functions;(ii) safe delivery of rehabilitation;(iii) referral principles;(iv) service delivery settings;and (v) health-care professionals. Findings We screened 13 753 titles and s, read 154 full-text articles, and included 37 articles. The current evidence is conceptual and expert based. Care model components included multidisciplinary teams, continuity or coordination of care, people-centred care and shared decision-making between clinicians and patients. Care model functions included standardized symptoms assessment, telehealth and virtual care and follow-up system. Rehabilitation services were integrated at all levels of a health system from primary care to tertiary hospital-based care. Health-care workers delivering services within a multidisciplinary team included mostly physiotherapists, occupational therapists and psychologists. Conclusion Key policy messages include implementing a multilevel and multiprofessional model;leveraging country health systems’ strengths and learning from other conditions;financing rehabilitation research providing standardized outcomes;and guidance to increase patient safety.

Effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions in adults with multi-organ dysfunction syndrome: A rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, defined as altered organ function in critically ill patients, is a possible consequence of COVID-19. Investigating the current evidence is therefore crucial in this pandemic, as early rehabilitation could be effective for the functioning of patients with multiple organ failure. This rapid review assesses the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions in adults with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. METHODS: A rapid review was conducted including only randomised control trials, published until 30 November 2020. All databases were investigated and the results synthesized narratively, evaluating the risk of bias and quality of evidence in all included studies. RESULTS: A total of 404 records were identified through database searches. After removal of duplicates 346 articles remained. After screening, 3 studies (90 participants) met the inclusion criteria. All studies reported positive effects of neuromuscular electrical stimulation on muscle mass preservation compared with no treatment or standard physio-therapy. CONCLUSION: The lack of evidence on the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions does not allow any firm conclusion to be drawn. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation might be a possible rehabilitation intervention to prevent muscle volume loss and improve function in patients with multiple organ dysfunction syndrome. However, further studies are needed to support these preliminary findings.

Cochrane Rehabilitation: 2020 annual report.

During its fourth year of existence, Cochrane Rehabilitation went on to promote evidence-informed health decision-making in rehabilitation. In 2020, the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has made it necessary to alter priorities. In these challenging times, Cochrane Rehabilitation has firstly changed its internal organisation and established a new relevant project in line with pandemic needs: the REH-COVER (Rehabilitation - COVID-19 evidence-based response) action. The aim was to focus on the timely collection, review and dissemination of summarised and synthesised evidence relating to COVID-19 and rehabilitation. Cochrane Rehabilitation REH-COVER action has included in 2020 five main initiatives: 1) rapid living systematic reviews on rehabilitation and COVID-19; 2) interactive living evidence map on rehabilitation and COVID-19; 3) definition of the research topics on "rehabilitation and COVID-19" in collaboration with the World Health Organization (WHO) rehabilitation programme; 4) Cochrane Library special collection on Coronavirus (COVID-19) rehabilitation; and 5) collaboration with COVID-END for the topics "rehabilitation" and "disability." Furthermore, we are still carrying on five different special projects: Be4rehab; RCTRACK; definition of rehabilitation for research purposes; ebook project; and a prioritization exercise for Cochrane Reviews production. The Review Working Area continued to identify and "tag" the rehabilitation-relevant reviews published in the Cochrane library; the Publication Working Area went on to publish Cochrane Corners, working more closely with the Cochrane Review Groups (CRGs) and Cochrane Networks, particularly with Cochrane Musculoskeletal, Oral, Skin and Sensory Network; the Education Working Area, the most damaged in 2020, tried to continue performing educational activities such as workshops in different online meetings; the Methodology Working Area organized the third and fourth Cochrane Rehabilitation Methodological (CRM) meetings respectively in Milan and Orlando; the Communication Working Area spread rehabilitation evidences through different channels and translated the contents in different languages.

"Rehabilitation Research Framework for Patients With COVID-19" Defined by Cochrane Rehabilitation and the World Health Organization Rehabilitation Programme.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in a surge of research activity. Since its outset, efforts have been made to guide the rapid generation of research in medicine. There are gaps in some areas of rehabilitation research for patients with COVID-19. The development of a specific research framework might serve to help monitor the status of research (mapping), shape and strengthen research by pointing to under-investigated areas, and promote rehabilitation research in this context. This article introduces and discusses the COVID-19 Rehabilitation Research Framework (CRRF) and presents the methodology used for its development. The questions have been developed among the World Health Organization (WHO) Rehabilitation Programme, Cochrane Rehabilitation, and the experts of its Rehabilitation-COVID-19 Evidence-based Response Action International Multiprofessional Steering Committee. The framework is divided into 2 parts and includes 20 questions organized in 4 groups: epidemiology, and evidence at the micro- (individual), meso- (health services), and macro- (health systems) levels. The CRRF offers a comprehensive view of the research areas relevant to COVID-19 and rehabilitation that are necessary to inform best practice and ensure rehabilitation services and health systems can best serve the population with COVID-19. The collaboration between Cochrane Rehabilitation and the WHO Rehabilitation Programme in establishing the CRRF brought together perspectives from the health systems, health management, and clinical evidence. The authors encourage researchers to use the CRRF when planning studies on rehabilitation in the context of COVID-19.