What are the Perceptions and Lived Experiences of Canadian Injured Workers about the Provision of Physiotherapy Services using Telerehabilitation?

Purpose: Despite evidence of efficacy, the effectiveness of telerehabilitation in real-world clinical settings is still largely unknown. Telerehabilitation requires a substantial transformation of the organization and delivery of traditional services. Considering that a virtual setting can create unique challenges for providing physiotherapy services and given the physical and potential hands-on nature of evidence-based assessments and interventions, it is important to investigate what injured workers think of receiving physiotherapy care via telerehabilitation and to examine if rehabilitation needs are adequately met.
Methods: A qualitative interpretive description study was conducted to explore the perspectives and experiences of 17 injured workers receiving physiotherapy via telerehabilitation. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews with participants from three provinces in Western Canada and analysed using thematic analysis. Qualitative rigour criteria of epistemological integrity, analytic logic, interpretive authority, and representative credibility were considered throughout this study.
Results: Implementation of telerehabilitation during the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in mixed perceptions from injured workers. Some viewed telerehabilitation as a resourceful option for providing services during the pandemic lockdown, resulting in maintained communications while overcoming barriers to services (e.g., rural/remote workers, transportation barriers, etc.). However, many thought telerehabilitation was inferior to in-person therapy for assessment and when 'hands-on' interaction was needed. Many believed a hybrid option may be ideal now that pandemic restrictions are lifted, with telerehabilitation supplementing in-person physiotherapy when needed.
Conclusions: Telerehabilitation was viewed as a resourceful option during the pandemic and in certain clinical situations (e.g., rural/remote). Workers should be able to make informed choices about service delivery format.
Competing Interests: Declarations. Conflict of interest: The authors declare no competing interests. Ethical Approval: Ethics approval was obtained from the research ethics boards of the Université de Montréal (CERSES-21-064-D), University of Alberta (Pro00110034), University of British Columbia (H21-01559) and University of Saskatchewan (reciprocal agreement with University of Alberta—Beh 2956). Human and Animal Participant: All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committees and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed Consent: All participants provided informed consent prior to participating in the study.
(© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)