Effectiveness of Telerehabilitation Programs in Elderly with Hip or Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

Background: Lower limb osteoarthritis (OA) often generates musculoskeletal pain causing functional impairment and decreasing mobility, autonomy, and quality of life. Patients with OA are commonly prescribed specific care for total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty (THA or TKA), when patients present symptoms that are refractory to nondrug treatments. Currently, when patients are discharged from orthopedic surgery, they are either referred to a rehabilitation department, or sent directly home with assistance such as remote monitoring by teleconsultation or a mobile application. In recent years, there has been an evolution in digital health and in particular telerehabilitation. To determine utility and effectiveness, the aim of this systematic review was to highlight and evaluate different telerehabilitation programs using new information and communication technologies. Methods: Five databases, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Web of Sciences, Scopus, and Google scholar, were searched until 30 June 30, 2023. All studies written in English and meeting our inclusion criteria were included. Databases were screened for "Total Hip Arthroplasty," "Total Knee Arthroplasty," "Total Hip Replacement," "Total Knee Replacement," "Rehabilitation," "Physical Activity," "Physiotherapy," "Telerehabilitation," "Telecommunication*," "Senior*," and "Elderly" in accordance with PRISMA-ScR guideline. Results: Fourteen articles were selected according to inclusion criteria. Telerehabilitation was offered in seven different ways (video call, applications smartphones, website, etc.). Assessments included were mainly quality of life questionnaires, perceived effort after exercises, field surveys on the tool experience, and physical tests to assess motor functions. Conclusion: This review highlights the importance and relevance of evaluating the contributions and limits of new health technologies to improve patient monitoring and thus enable better remote clinical care.

Providing different levels of accuracy about the reliability of automation to a human operator: impact on human performance.

Previous research has suggested that supervising automation can lead to a decrease in human performance, especially when automation is not totally reliable. Providing context-related information about reliability can help operators to better adjust their behaviour in a human-automation interaction context. However, previous studies have not specified the level of accuracy that this information should provide to the human operator. The objective of this study was to investigate the effects of different levels of information accuracy about an automation's reliability on human performance. Results showed that accuracy of information about reliability improves performance when specific percentages of reliability were given to the participants. Participants had a better performance in the condition of high accuracy of information. A link between perceived reliability and trust was found: the more the trust in automation increased, the more the perceived reliability increased.Practitioner summary: The experiment dealt with how accurate information about automation's reliability influences people's performance when supervising an automated task. Overall, this research suggests that designing systems that provide accurate, useful information can reduce the frequency of automation bias. Trust and perceived reliability of automation are related.Abbreviations: MATB: multi attribute task battery.

Influence of human-machine interactions and task demand on automation selection and use.

A seminal work by Sheridan and Verplank depicted 10 levels of automation, ranging from no automation to an automation that acts completely autonomously without human support. These levels of automation were later complemented with a four-stage model of human information processing. Next, human-machine cooperation centred models and associated cooperation modes were introduced. The objective of the experiment was to test which human-machine theorie describe automation use better. The participants were asked to choose repeatedly between four automation types (i.e. no automation, warning, co-action, function delegation) to complete three multi-attribute task battery tasks. The results showed that the participants favour the selection of automation types offering the best human-machine interactions quality rather that the most effective automation type. Contrary to human-machine cooperation models, technology centred models could not predict accurately automation selection. The most advanced automation was not the most selected. Practitioner Summary: The experiment dealt with how people select different automation types to complete the multi-attribute task battery that emulates recreational aircraft pilot tasks. Automation performance was not the main criteria that explain automation use, as people tend to select an automation type based on the quality of the human-machine cooperation.