ABSTRACT
The advancement of computer science technologies and telemedical devices has led to an increase in the use of telerehabilitation (TR) as a therapeutic intervention. In our days, TR interventions can be considered as alternative solutions to face-to-face therapy. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate whether TR can be effective in physiotherapy. This can be adjudicated by investigating the use of the TR applications, their cost effect, and the level of effectiveness each one of them can provide. Randomized controlled trials that were published between 2003 and 2023 in the English language and used TR as the intervention were collected from online databases (MEDLINE, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), and Cochrane) to be reviewed. Twenty of them met the criteria and were included in the study. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria were categorized by the body system investigated. Out of the 20 studies that met the inclusive criteria, five are related to the musculoskeletal system, six are related to the nervous system, two are related to proprioception and balance, one is related to the respiratory system, one is related to the cardiovascular system, two are related to pelvic floor control, and three are related to autoimmune disorders. Studies have shown that implementing TR has resulted in significant improvements in terms of functionality, muscle strength, endurance, and self-improvement. Proprioception, autoimmune diseases, and cardiovascular health have shown the most improvement. The most commonly used tools for implementing TR are gamified virtual reality (VR) and digital apps. However, there are some disadvantages, such as the lack of personal contact and the cost involved. We found that TR has the potential to positively impact various health disorders, making it a suitable form of therapy for people who can't receive in-person treatment. Nonetheless, it cannot replace traditional physiotherapy, nor does it hold the same value as it.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The 12-item International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT12) is a patient-reported outcome (PRO) designed to evaluate quality of life. We assessed the psychometric properties of the Greek version (iHOT12-Gr) in hip osteoarthritic patients. METHODS: Data from 124 patients aged > 50 years were used for factor analysis. Reliability evaluation included internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and interpretability. Content validity was examined by calculating the item-level content validity indices (I-CVI) and the scale-level content validity indices (S-CVI), using two methods: S-CVI Average (S-CVI/Ave), and the S-CVI Universal Agreement among experts (S-CVI/UA). Construct validity was tested against Greek versions of the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS-Greek), Modified Harris Hip Score (MHHS-Gr), and the 30 s chair-to-stand, Timed Up & Go (TUG), and 9-stairs-ascend/descend (9S-A/D) tests. Known-groups validity was examined using LEFS-Greek (cut-off = 53 points) as estimate variable. Responsiveness was examined pre and post total hip arthroplasty (4 and 8 weeks). RESULTS: Factor analysis revealed a two-factor model. Factor-1 (items 1-9) reflects "Symptoms and functionality", while Factor-2 (items 10-12) reflects "Hip disorder-related concerns". Reliability: Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of iHOT12-Gr-total were excellent: Cronbach's alpha > 0.92 and ICC(95% CI) > 0.976(0.96-0.99)(p < 0.001). Interpretability: There was no floor or ceiling effect; measurement error: 3.72 (Factor-1), 3.64 (Factor-2), and 3.22 (iHOT12-Gr-total); minimal detectable change: 10.3 (Factor-1), 10.1 (Factor-2), and 8.92 (iHOT12-Gr-total). VALIDITY: Content validity: The I-CVI value of the 12 items ranged from 1.00 to 0.83, the S-CVI/Ave was 0.97 and the S-CVI/UA was 0.83. Construct validity: iHOT12-Gr correlated strongly with both LEFS-Greek and MHHS-Gr, and weakly but significantly with 30s chair-to-stand, TUG and 9S-A/D (p < 0.001). Known-groups validity showed that iHOT12-Gr well discriminated subgroups of patients (p < 0.001). ROC analysis cut-off points were 51.9 (Factor-1), 25 (Factor-2) and 45.2 (iHOT12-Gr-total) (p < 0.001). Responsiveness: Four and 8 weeks postoperatively, standardized response means of Factor-1, Factor-2, and iHOT12-Gr-total were > 0.8. CONCLUSION: iHOT12-Gr showed excellent reliability properties. The content validity was excellent and significant weak-to-strong correlations were found regarding construct validity. The known-group validity was also significant, while the responsiveness was excellent. iHOT12-Gr could be a reliable and valid PRO for assessing quality of life in patients with hip osteoarthritis.
