Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Usability of a telerehabilitation program for patients with musculoskeletal or oncological diseases: A mixed-methods evaluation / Benutzerfreundlichkeit eines Telerehabilitations-Programmes für Patient*innen mit muskuloskelettalen oder onkologischen Erkrankungen: Eine Mixed-Methods Evaluation Cover

Usability of a telerehabilitation program for patients with musculoskeletal or oncological diseases: A mixed-methods evaluation / Benutzerfreundlichkeit eines Telerehabilitations-Programmes für Patient*innen mit muskuloskelettalen oder onkologischen Erkrankungen: Eine Mixed-Methods Evaluation

Open Access
|Apr 2024

Figures & Tables

Figure 1:

Convergent mixed-methods design (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017).
Convergent mixed-methods design (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2017).

Figure 2:

Patients’ individual motives for participating in telerehabilitation (multiple responses possible, n = 86).
Patients’ individual motives for participating in telerehabilitation (multiple responses possible, n = 86).

Figure 3:

Treatment team’s individual motives for participating in telerehabilitation (multiple responses possible, n = 31).
Treatment team’s individual motives for participating in telerehabilitation (multiple responses possible, n = 31).

Figure 4:

Technical infrastructure available for telerehabilitation (multiple responses possible).
Technical infrastructure available for telerehabilitation (multiple responses possible).

The treatment team’s assessment of the feasibility and comprehensibility of different session formats_

RatingResponse, n (%)
Very goodGoodNeitherBadVery badTotal
Feasibility and comprehensibility of different session formats assessed by the treatment team
Patient education seminars13 (59)6 (27)2 (9)1 (5)0 (0)23 (100)
Individual therapy and counseling10 (36)9 (32)4 (14)5 (18)0 (0)28 (100)
Group training sessions5 (20)6 (24)13 (52)1 (4)0 (0)25 (100)

Patients’ characteristics_

CharacteristicsCategoryn (%)
Sex
Female55 (64)
Male31 (36)
Total86 (100)
Indication
Musculoskeletal diseases67 (78)
Oncological diseases19 (22)
Total86 (100)
Highest educational level
Compulsory school4 (5)
Apprenticeship20 (24)
Vocational middle school13 (15)
University entrance qualification18 (21)
University degree26 (31)
Other qualification after university entrance qualification4 (5)
Total85 (100)
Employment situation
White-collar67 (79)
Blue-collar12 (14)
Currently not employed3 (4)
Receiving social benefits3 (4)
Total85 (100)

Comparison of the treatment team’s and patients’ views on the use of telerehabilitation_

AgreementResponse, n (%)
AgreePartly agreeNeitherPartly disagreeDisagreeTotal
Ability to quickly learn how to use the telerehabilitation system
Patients74 (86)9 (10)2 (2)1 (1)0 (0)86 (100)
Treatment team12 (39)14 (45)5 (16)0 (0)0 (0)31 (100)
Information exchange was comprehensible
Patients68 (79)16 (19)1 (1)1 (1)0 (0)86 (100)
Treatment team3 (9)16 (50)8 (25)4 (13)1 (3)32 (100)
Therapeutic contents were adequately conveyed
Patients68 (79)17 (20)1 (1)0 (0)0 (0)86 (100)
Treatment team4 (13)11 (35)12 (39)4 (13)0 (0)31 (100)
Amount of time spent on telerehabilitation was appropriate
Patients41 (48)29 (34)11 (13)4 (5)1 (1)86 (100)
Time for conducting telerehabilitation was comparable to face-to-face sessions
Treatment team3 (10)4 (13)5 (16)11 (35)8 (26)31 (100)
Language: English, German
Page range: 49 - 60
Submitted on: Jul 12, 2023
Accepted on: Jan 24, 2024
Published on: Apr 28, 2024
Published by: ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2024 Doreen Stöhr, Martin Matzka, Stefan Gschwenter, Alexandra Edlmayer, David Felder, Andreas Spary, Gabriele Reiger, Martina Honegger, Martin Skoumal, published by ZHAW Zurich University of Applied Sciences
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.