Digital physical therapy practice and payment during the COVID-19 pandemic: A case series.

BACKGROUND: Insurance regulation and reimbursement are barriers to physical therapy-delivered digital practice. OBJECTIVE: The present case series describes the clinical reasoning, outcomes, and practical use of digital tools to improve pain and movement of patients seen for musculoskeletal pain during the COVID-19 pandemic. CASE DESCRIPTION: Three patients, 2 with low back pain and 1 with cervicogenic headache, were treated at a private outpatient clinic. Collaborative reasoning was used to determine appropriate use of digital tools. Because of the pandemic, one patient used telephone visits to complete treatment (25% of total visits), one used telehealth visits only during stay-at-home orders (33% of total visits), and one was evaluated and treated entirely using telehealth (100% of total visits). All visits were billed and paid for by the patient or insurance at the same rate as an in-person visit. OUTCOMES: All 3 patients met self-reported goals for physical therapy, met or surpassed their risk-adjusted predicted functional status score, and expressed high satisfaction with treatment. CONCLUSION: Individualized prescription and execution of digital physical therapy practice allowed patients with musculoskeletal pain to have effective physical therapy care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Removal of regulatory and payment barriers were necessary for the provision of care.

Patient Expectations for Synchronous Telerehabilitation Visits: A Survey Study of Telerehabilitation-Naive Patients.

Introduction: The current study evaluated patient expectations for synchronous telerehabilitation. Because the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic decreased regulatory barriers and increased accessibility of telehealth, improved understanding of expectations may direct future educational efforts, improve implementation strategies, and inform future analyses of consumer adoption and utilization of telehealth. Methods: A cross-sectional survey design was used to measure ideal expectations (what they want to happen) and realistic expectations (what they think will happen) of telerehabilitation-naive patients for synchronous telerehabilitation. Participants were recruited through e-mail and social media and in person from seven outpatient private practice physical therapy clinics across the United States. Patients completed an online anonymous adaptation of the Patients' Expectations Questionnaire (PEQ) and were asked whether they expected synchronous telerehabilitation to benefit them personally. Open-ended responses were collected and analyzed for categories and themes. Results: Of 178 participants, the greatest mean difference between ideal and realistic expectations among PEQ subscales was for outcomes (0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.60), and the greatest mean difference among individual items was for symptom reduction (0.53; 95% CI, 0.41-0.66). Although participants appeared to appreciate the value of telerehabilitation visits, with 69.7% indicating that it would benefit them personally, many expressed a preference for face-to-face visits when possible. Discussion: Expectations were mostly positive. Lower outcomes expectations may be a potential barrier to adoption and utilization of telehealth and other types of digital physical therapy in some patients. Conclusions: To improve beliefs and address potential barriers, physical therapy clinicians should discuss expectations with patients before recommending telerehabilitation visits.