Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Jun 9:9:20552076231176696.
doi: 10.1177/20552076231176696. eCollection 2023 Jan-Dec.

Effectiveness of biofeedback-assisted asynchronous telerehabilitation in musculoskeletal care: A systematic review

Dora Janela  1 , Fabíola Costa  1 , Brandon Weiss  2 , Anabela C Areias  1 , Maria Molinos  1 , Justin K Scheer  3 , Jorge Lains  4   5 , Virgílio Bento  1 , Steven P Cohen  6   7 , Fernando Dias Correia  1   8 , Vijay Yanamadala  1   9   10
Affiliations
Review

Effectiveness of biofeedback-assisted asynchronous telerehabilitation in musculoskeletal care: A systematic review

Dora Janela et al. Digit Health. .

Abstract

Background: Musculoskeletal conditions are the leading cause of disability worldwide. Telerehabilitation may be a viable option in the management of these conditions, facilitating access and patient adherence. Nevertheless, the impact of biofeedback-assisted asynchronous telerehabilitation remains unknown.

Objective: To systematically review and assess the effectiveness of exercise-based asynchronous biofeedback-assisted telerehabilitation on pain and function in individuals with musculoskeletal conditions.

Methods: This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The search was conducted using three databases: PubMed, Scopus, and PEDro. Study criteria included articles written in English and published from January 2017 to August 2022, reporting interventional trials evaluating exercise-based asynchronous telerehabilitation using biofeedback in adults with musculoskeletal disorders. The risks of bias and certainty of evidence were appraised using the Cochrane tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE), respectively. The results are narratively summarized, and the effect sizes of the main outcomes were calculated.

Results: Fourteen trials were included: 10 using motion tracker technology (N = 1284) and four with camera-based biofeedback (N = 467). Telerehabilitation with motion trackers yields at least similar improvements in pain and function in people with musculoskeletal conditions (effect sizes: 0.19-1.45; low certainty of evidence). Uncertain evidence exists for the effectiveness of camera-based telerehabilitation (effect sizes: 0.11-0.13; very low evidence). No study found superior results in a control group.

Conclusions: Asynchronous telerehabilitation may be an option in the management of musculoskeletal conditions. Considering its potential for scalability and access democratization, additional high-quality research is needed to address long-term outcomes, comparativeness, and cost-effectiveness and identify treatment responders.

Keywords: Pain; motion sensors; nonsynchronous care; physical therapy; remote care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) flow chart of study selection process.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Risk of bias (ROB) assessment for (a) randomized trials (ROB 2.0) and (b) non-randomized trials. (ROBINS-I: ROB in non-randomized studies of interventions).
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Effect direction plots. Telerehabilitation versus comparison groups with two sub-groups: inertial motion trackers biofeedback and camera-based biofeedback: (a) pain (b) function.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. World Health Organization (WHO). Musculoskeletal health. available at: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/musculoskeletal-conditions (2022, accessed 27 February 2023).
    1. Cieza A, Causey K, Kamenov K, et al.Global estimates of the need for rehabilitation based on the Global Burden of Disease study 2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019. Lancet 2020; 396: 2006–2017. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Institute of Medicine Committee on Advancing Pain Research C and Education. The National Academies Collection: reports funded by National Institutes of Health. Relieving Pain in America: a Blueprint for Transforming Prevention, Care, Education, and Research. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011.
    1. National Institute for health and care excellence (NICE). Chronic pain (primary and secondary) in over16s: assessment of all chronic pain and management of chronic primary pain . National Institute for Health and Care Excellence UK (NICE); 2021.
    1. Qaseem A, Wilt TJ, McLean RM, et al.Noninvasive treatments for acute, subacute, and chronic low back pain: a clinical practice guideline from the American college of physicians. Ann Intern Med 2017; 166: 514–530. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources