We have located links that may give you full text access.
Evaluating Effectiveness of Telerehabilitation Services Among Injured Workers Treated in a Canadian Workers' Compensation System: A Population-Based Study.
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation 2024 January 25
PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of telerehabilitation for promoting return-to-work (RTW) among injured workers.
METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, quasi-experimental study comparing telerehabilitation, in-person, or hybrid services. Descriptive statistics analyzed demographics, occupational factors, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Kruskal-Wallis tests investigated differences between mode of delivery and changes in PROM scores. Logistic and Cox-proportional hazard regression examined associations between mode of delivery and RTW status or days receiving wage replacement benefits in the first-year post-discharge, respectively, while controlling for potential confounders.
RESULTS: A slightly higher percentage of the 3,708 worker sample were male (52.8%). Mean (standard deviation (SD)) age across all delivery formats was 45.5 (12.5) years. Edmonton zone had the highest amount of telerehabilitation delivery (53.5%). The majority of workers had their program delivered in a hybrid format (54.1%) and returned to work (74.4%) at discharge. All PROMs showed improvement although differences across delivery formats were not clinically meaningful. Delivery via telerehabilitation had significantly lower odds of RTW at discharge (Odds Ratio: 0.82, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.70-0.97) and a significantly lower risk of experiencing suspension of wage replacement benefits in the first year following discharge (Hazard Ratio: 0.92, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.84-0.99). Associations were no longer significant when confounders were controlled for.
CONCLUSION: RTW outcomes were not statistically different across delivery formats, suggesting that telerehabilitation is a novel strategy that may improve equitable access and earlier engagement in occupational rehabilitation. Factors such as gender and geographic location should be considered when deciding on service delivery format.
METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, quasi-experimental study comparing telerehabilitation, in-person, or hybrid services. Descriptive statistics analyzed demographics, occupational factors, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Kruskal-Wallis tests investigated differences between mode of delivery and changes in PROM scores. Logistic and Cox-proportional hazard regression examined associations between mode of delivery and RTW status or days receiving wage replacement benefits in the first-year post-discharge, respectively, while controlling for potential confounders.
RESULTS: A slightly higher percentage of the 3,708 worker sample were male (52.8%). Mean (standard deviation (SD)) age across all delivery formats was 45.5 (12.5) years. Edmonton zone had the highest amount of telerehabilitation delivery (53.5%). The majority of workers had their program delivered in a hybrid format (54.1%) and returned to work (74.4%) at discharge. All PROMs showed improvement although differences across delivery formats were not clinically meaningful. Delivery via telerehabilitation had significantly lower odds of RTW at discharge (Odds Ratio: 0.82, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.70-0.97) and a significantly lower risk of experiencing suspension of wage replacement benefits in the first year following discharge (Hazard Ratio: 0.92, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.84-0.99). Associations were no longer significant when confounders were controlled for.
CONCLUSION: RTW outcomes were not statistically different across delivery formats, suggesting that telerehabilitation is a novel strategy that may improve equitable access and earlier engagement in occupational rehabilitation. Factors such as gender and geographic location should be considered when deciding on service delivery format.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app