Abstract
Objective: To describe telehealth interventions delivered by allied health professionals and nurses in rural and remote areas and compare the effects of telehealth interventions with standard face-to-face interventions.
Data sources: CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO and PubMed were searched. Content of relevant journals and published articles were also searched.
Study selection: Studies examining the effectiveness of allied health and nursing telehealth interventions for rural and remote populations were included in descriptive analyses. Studies comparing telehealth intervention with standard face-to-face interventions were used to examine between-groups effect sizes.
Data extraction: Methodological quality of studies was rated using the QualSyst critical appraisal tool and the NHMRC Evidence Hierarchy levels.
Data synthesis: After quality ratings, 43 studies were included. A majority of studies had strong methodological quality. Disciplines of psychology and nursing were most frequently represented, as were studies using a cognitive intervention approach.
Meta-analysis results slightly favoured telehealth interventions compared with face-to-face interventions. Interventions using a combined physical and cognitive approached were most effective. Conclusion: Telehealth services are at least as effective as face-to-face interventions, which is positive given the potential benefits of telehealth in rural and remote areas with regards to healthcare access and time and cost savings.
Data sources: CINAHL, Embase, PsycINFO and PubMed were searched. Content of relevant journals and published articles were also searched.
Study selection: Studies examining the effectiveness of allied health and nursing telehealth interventions for rural and remote populations were included in descriptive analyses. Studies comparing telehealth intervention with standard face-to-face interventions were used to examine between-groups effect sizes.
Data extraction: Methodological quality of studies was rated using the QualSyst critical appraisal tool and the NHMRC Evidence Hierarchy levels.
Data synthesis: After quality ratings, 43 studies were included. A majority of studies had strong methodological quality. Disciplines of psychology and nursing were most frequently represented, as were studies using a cognitive intervention approach.
Meta-analysis results slightly favoured telehealth interventions compared with face-to-face interventions. Interventions using a combined physical and cognitive approached were most effective. Conclusion: Telehealth services are at least as effective as face-to-face interventions, which is positive given the potential benefits of telehealth in rural and remote areas with regards to healthcare access and time and cost savings.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 225-235 |
| Number of pages | 11 |
| Journal | Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine |
| Volume | 50 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| Early online date | 19 Dec 2017 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Mar 2018 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Bibliographical note
Copyright 2018 Foundation of Rehabilitation Information. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.Keywords
- telemedicine
- video conferencing
- delivery of healthcare
- treatment outcome
- outcome assessment
- rural population
- rural health
- remote consultation