Background: Measures used to prevent adverse events during the implementation of exercise sessions delivered via telerehabilitation can be varied, ranging from simple telephone monitoring to synchronous therapist-led sessions. However, this information is scattered in the literature, as evidence synthesis studies have only addressed the safety, satisfaction, and effectiveness aspects of exercise delivered via telerehabilitation.
Aims: This scoping review aims to describe that measures are used to ensure safety during exercise sessions delivered to people with stroke through telerehabilitation, as reported by authors of primary studies. Secondarily, it describes the designs most frequently used to notify the effects of telerehabilitation and evidence level, the characteristics of the participants and type of stroke, and the characteristics of telerehabilitation.
Summary of review: A scoping review was conducted according to the Joana Briggs Institute (JBI) recommendations. A systematic search of MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CENTRAL, and CINHAL was conducted from inception to August 2022, and a review of systematic review references on the topic. We included primary studies that enrolled adults with stroke who underwent exercise delivered via telerehabilitation. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction, and disagreements were resolved by consensus or a third reviewer. A qualitative analysis of the information was performed. One hundred seven primary studies (3991 participants) published between 2002 and 2022 were included. Most studies were case series (43%) and rated with an Oxford level of evidence of "4" (55.3%). Regarding randomized clinical trials, half included 53 or more participants (IQR 26.75 to 81). Most studies applied the exercises via asynchronous telerehabilitation (55.1%), of which only ten reported measures to avoid adverse events. Some of the measures included assessing the location where exercises are to be performed, only using a seated position, and using live warning systems that prevent or stop exercises when they are risky.
Conclusions: Reporting of measures implemented to prevent adverse events during exercise delivery via asynchronous telerehabilitation is scarce. Future primary studies should always consider reporting adverse events related to exercise delivery via telerehabilitation and strategies implemented to decrease the incidence of these unwanted safety events.
Registration number: INPLASY202290104.
Keywords: Telerehabilitation; safety; scoping review; stroke; telehealth.