Advanced Search

Home > Journals > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine > Past Issues > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2015 June;51(3) > European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2015 June;51(3):311-25

ISSUES AND ARTICLES   MOST READ   eTOC

CURRENT ISSUEEUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL AND REHABILITATION MEDICINE

A Journal on Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation after Pathological Events

Official Journal of the Italian Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (SIMFER), European Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ESPRM), European Union of Medical Specialists - Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine Section (UEMS-PRM), Mediterranean Forum of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (MFPRM), Hellenic Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (EEFIAP)
In association with International Society of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (ISPRM)
Indexed/Abstracted in: CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,063

Frequency: Bi-Monthly

ISSN 1973-9087

Online ISSN 1973-9095

 

European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2015 June;51(3):311-25

    COCHRANE CORNER

Telerehabilitation for persons with multiple sclerosis. A Cochrane review

Khan F. 1, 2, 3, Amatya B. 1, Kesselring J. 4, Galea M. P. 1, 2

1 Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, VIC, Australia;
2 Department of Medicine (Royal Melbourne Hospital), University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia;
3 School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, VIC, Australia;
4 Department of Neurology and Neurorehabilitation, Rehabilitation Center, Valens, Switzerland

A wide range of telerehabilitation interventions are trialled in persons with multiple sclerosis (pwMS). However, the evidence for their effectiveness is unclear. Aim of the review was to systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of telerehabilitation intervention in pwMS, the types of approaches that are effective (setting, type, intensity) and the outcomes (impairment, activity limitation and participation) that are affected. The search strategy comprised: Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System Review Group Specialised Register (up to 9 July, 2014). Relevant journals and reference lists of identified studies were screened for additional data. Selected studies included randomized and controlled clinical trials that compared telerehabilitation intervention/s in pwMS with a control intervention (such as lower level or different types of intervention, minimal intervention; waiting-list controls, no treatment or usual care; interventions given in different settings). Best evidence synthesis was based on methodological quality using the GRADEpro software. Nine RCTs (N.=531 participants, 469 included in analyses) investigated a variety of telerehabilitation interventions in adults with MS. The interventions evaluated were complex, with more than one rehabilitation component and included physical activity, educational, behavioural and symptom management programmes. All studies scored “low” on the methodological quality assessment. Evidence from included studies provides ‘low-level’ evidence for reduction in short-term disability (and symptoms) such as fatigue. There was also “low-level” evidence supporting telerehabilitation in the longer term for improved functional activities, impairments (such as fatigue, pain, insomnia); and participation. There were limited data on process evaluation (participants’/therapists’ satisfaction) and no data available for cost effectiveness. There were no adverse events reported as a result of telerehabilitation intervention. There is limited evidence to date, on the efficacy of telerehabilitation in improving functional activities, fatigue and quality of life in adults with MS. There is also insufficient evidence to support what types of telerehabilitation interventions are effective, and in which setting. More robust trials are needed to build evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of these interventions.

language: English


FULL TEXT  REPRINTS

top of page