Search

Background/Objective: Over the past two decades, the utilization of virtual care in rehabilitation has witnessed a significant surge; this is owing to the widespread availability of technological tools and the global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, discussions surrounding the relevance and benefits of telerehabilitation have gained prominence among practitioners, who continually seek to enhance patient care while maintaining high standards of quality. Associated with these discussions are concerns over being able to provide care in an ethical way, as well as addressing equity issues that might be hindered or improved via telerehabilitation. To address the ethical and equity concerns around telerehabilitation, a series of five parallel rapid reviews of the scientific literature were conducted, focusing on different rehabilitation fields: physiotherapy and occupational therapy (1); speech therapy and audiology (2); psychology and neuropsychology (3); and in two age groups: older adults (4); and pediatrics and young adults (5). The objective of this series of rapid reviews is to evaluate the evidence presented regarding telerehabilitation; identifying and recommending best practices especially in the realm of ethics and equity. Methods: Medline; CINAHL; and EMBASE were searched between 2010 and 2023 for English or French-language reviews (2010–2020) and individual studies (2020–2023) pertaining to telerehabilitation and these fields of interest. Data were extracted following a standardized form focusing on: outcomes; findings; quality assessment/biases; limitations; and discussion of ethical and equity concerns. Results: The results are presented according to the most relevant themes, which include: findings; strengths; limitations; and ethical/equity considerations. Conclusions: This research presents a methodology rarely published before, on how to conduct multiple parallel rapid reviews on the theme of telerehabilitation, based on different rehabilitation fields and age groups. This research will shape future guidelines and standards in applying ethical and equity standards in telerehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives:Immigrants are typically healthier than the native-born population in the receiving country and also tend to be healthier than non-migrants in the countries of origin. This foreign-born health advantage has been referred to as the healthy immigrant effect (HIE). We examined evidence for the HIE in Canada. Design:We employed a systematic search of the literature on immigration and health and identified 78 eligible studies. We used a narrative method to synthesize the HIE across different stages of the life-course and different health outcomes within each stage. We also examined the empirical evidence for positive selection and duration effects – two common explanations of migrants’ health advantage and deterioration, respectively. Results:We find that the HIE appears to be strongest during adulthood but less so during childhood/adolescence and late life. A foreign-born health advantage is also more robust for mortality but less so for morbidity. The HIE is also stronger for more recent immigrants but further research is needed to determine the critical threshold for when migrants’ advantage disappears. Positive selection as an explanation for the HIE remains underdeveloped. Conclusions:There is an absence of a uniform foreign-born health advantage across different life-course stages and health outcomes in Canada. Nonetheless, it remains the case that the HIE characterizes the majority of contemporary migrants since Canada’s foreign-born population consists mostly of core working age adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]