Physical Therapists’ Opinion of E-Health Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain

1) Background: Using new technologies to manage home exercise programmes is an approach that allows more patients to benefit from therapy. The objective of this study is to explore physical therapists’ opinions of the efficacy and disadvantages of implementing a web-based telerehabilitation programme for treating chronic low back pain (CLBP). (2) Methods: Nineteen physical therapists from academic and healthcare fields in both the public and private sector participated in the qualitative study. Texts extracted from a transcript of semi-structured, individual, in-depth interviews with each consenting participant were analysed to obtain the participants’ prevailing opinions. The interviews lasted approximately 40 min each. The participants’ responses were recorded. (3) Results: The results suggest that telerehabilitation can only be successful if patients become actively involved in their own treatment. However, exercise programmes for LBP are not always adapted to patient preferences. New technologies allow physical therapists to provide their patients with the follow-up and remote contact they demand, but long-term adherence to treatment stems from knowledge of the exercises and the correct techniques employed by the patients themselves. (4) Conclusions: Physical therapists treating patients with chronic non-specific low back pain believe that new technologies can provide highly effective means of reaching a greater number of patients and achieving significant savings in healthcare costs, despite the limitations of a telerehabilitation approach in developing an appropriate and effective patient-based physiotherapy programme

Physical Therapists’ Opinion of E-Health Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain

(1) Background: Using new technologies to manage home exercise programmes is an approach that allows more patients to benefit from therapy. The objective of this study is to explore physical therapists’ opinions of the efficacy and disadvantages of implementing a web-based tele-rehabilitation programme for treating chronic low back pain (CLBP). (2) Methods: Nineteen physical therapists from academic and healthcare fields in both the public and private sector participated in the qualitative study. Texts extracted from a transcript of semi-structured, individual, in-depth interviews with each consenting participant were analysed to obtain the participants’ prevailing opinions. The interviews lasted approximately 40 min each. The participants’ responses were rec-orded. (3) Results: The results suggest that telerehabilitation can only be successful if patients be-come actively involved in their own treatment. However, exercise programmes for LBP are not al-ways adapted to patient preferences. New technologies allow physical therapists to provide their patients with the follow-up and remote contact they demand, but long-term adherence to treatment stems from knowledge of the exercises and the correct techniques employed by the patients them-selves. (4) Conclusions: Physical therapists treating patients with chronic non-specific low back pain believe that new technologies can provide highly effective means of reaching a greater number of patients and achieving significant savings in healthcare costs, despite the limitations of a telereha-bilitation approach in developing an appropriate and effective patient-based physiotherapy pro-gramme.European Commission - European Regional Development FundSpanish Ministry of Education and Vocational TrainingI+D+i of Biomedical and Health Sciences in AndalusiaInstituto de Salud Carlos IIIEuropean Social Fun

Physical Therapists’ Opinion of E-Health Treatment of Chronic Low Back Pain

(1) Background: Using new technologies to manage home exercise programmes is an approach that allows more patients to benefit from therapy. The objective of this study is to explore physical therapists’ opinions of the efficacy and disadvantages of implementing a web-based telerehabilitation programme for treating chronic low back pain (CLBP). (2) Methods: Nineteen physical therapists from academic and healthcare fields in both the public and private sector participated in the qualitative study. Texts extracted from a transcript of semi-structured, individual, in-depth interviews with each consenting participant were analysed to obtain the participants’ prevailing opinions. The interviews lasted approximately 40 min each. The participants’ responses were recorded. (3) Results: The results suggest that telerehabilitation can only be successful if patients become actively involved in their own treatment. However, exercise programmes for LBP are not always adapted to patient preferences. New technologies allow physical therapists to provide their patients with the follow-up and remote contact they demand, but long-term adherence to treatment stems from knowledge of the exercises and the correct techniques employed by the patients themselves. (4) Conclusions: Physical therapists treating patients with chronic non-specific low back pain believe that new technologies can provide highly effective means of reaching a greater number of patients and achieving significant savings in healthcare costs, despite the limitations of a telerehabilitation approach in developing an appropriate and effective patient-based physiotherapy programme

Comparing an e-Health program vs home rehabilitation program in patients with non-specific low back pain: A study protocol randomized feasibility trial.

There is little evidence on the reliability of the web application-based rehabilitation systems to treat chronic low back pain (CLBP). This protocol describes a double-blind, randomized controlled feasibility trial of an e-Health intervention developed to support the self-management of people with CLBP in primary care physiotherapy. Three Hospitals with primary care for outpatients will be the units of randomisation, in each Hospital the participants will be randomized to one of two groups, a pragmatic control group receiving either the usual home program based on electrostimulation and McKenzie Therapy and e-Health intervention. Patients are followed up at 2 and 6 months. The primary outcomes are (1) acceptability and demand of the intervention by GPs, physiotherapists and patients and (2) feasibility and optimal study design/methods for a definitive trial. Secondary outcomes will include analysis in the clinical outcomes of pain, disability, fear of movement, quality of life, isometric resistance of the trunk flexors, lumbar anteflexion and lumbar segmental range of motion. The specific e-Health programs to home could increase adherence to treatment, prevent stages of greater pain and disability, and improve the painful symptomatology. The e-Health programs could be an effective healthcare tool that can reach a large number of people living in rural or remote areas