Telerehabilitation for stroke has potential to deliver care to many, but widespread adoption requires overcoming obstacles such as digital exclusion, altered interactions, and staff fatigue.
Does telerehabilitation improve rehabilitation outcomes in patients after stroke?
While telerehabilitation for stroke appears non-inferior to face-to-face therapy, widespread adoption must address critical challenges including digital exclusion, altered clinical interactions, and staff fatigue.
The use of telerehabilitation after stroke has necessarily increased in the last 2 years because of the COVID-19 pandemic, and many rehabilitation teams rapidly adapted to offering their services remotely. Evidence supporting the efficacy of telerehabilitation is still scarce with few randomized controlled trials, although current systematic reviews suggest that telerehabilitation does not lead to inferior outcomes when compared to face-to-face treatment. Increasing experience of telerehabilitation however has highlighted some of the pitfalls that need to be solved before we see widespread pragmatic adoption of new practices. We must ensure that offering services using digital technologies does not exclude those who need our services. We must acknowledge that our interactions online differ, both in the way we relate to each other and in the content of clinical consultations. Furthermore, we need to consider how to support staff who may be feeling disconnected and fatigued after spending hours providing remote therapies. Telerehabilitation is likely here to stay and has potential to help deliver rehabilitation to the many people who could benefit, but there are obstacles, challenges and trade-offs to be considered and overcome.
Laver et al. (Sat,) conducted a editorial in Stroke. Telerehabilitation vs. Face-to-face treatment was evaluated. Telerehabilitation for stroke has potential to deliver care to many, but widespread adoption requires overcoming obstacles such as digital exclusion, altered interactions, and staff fatigue.