Authors (including presenting author) :
CHAN A(1), YIP CC(1), NGAN GYK(1), NG CL(1), TSE CW(1), TO WKR(1)
Affiliation :
(1)Physiotherapy Department, Pok Oi Hospital
Introduction :
Telecare service has become increasingly popular in recent years. It allows physiotherapists to extend their reach, especially for patients who have difficulties in accessing outpatient services or living in rural areas. Telecare service can reduce transportation barrier. Also, without the constraints of physical locations, a larger population can be served in one session. However, the effectiveness of Structural Non-Surgical Treatment Program (SNTP) telecare service is still unclear. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of telecare and face-to-face physiotherapy services (SNTP) provided at the Outpatient Physiotherapy Department of Pok Oi Hospital for patients with Osteoarthritis (OA) knee.
Objectives :
The objectives of this study are to evaluate and compare the outcomes of patients with OA knee who is referred to SNTP through retrospective data analysis using the Clinical Data Analysis and Reporting System (CDARS).
Methodology :
This was a retrospective study. Patients with OA knee who were referred for SNTP were recruited for data analysis. The outcome measures included: (1) Numeric Global Rate of Change Scale (NGRCS), (2) Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), (3) Body Mass Index (BMI), (4) 30 seconds Chair Stand Test (30CST), (5) Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Pain (KOOS-KP) (6) Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function (KOOS-KPS) and (7) Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Quality of Life (KOOS-KQ). Paired T-test was used to compare telecare and face-to-face data of outcomes 1-7. And independent paired T-test was used to compare between groups.
Result & Outcome :
From 1 October 2023 to 20 September 2024, 1,371 subjects completed 6 sessions of face-to-face sessions and 77 subjects completed 6 sessions of telecare sessions were included for data analysis.
Subjects in face-to-face group demonstrated significant improvement in NGRCS (from mean of -0.04 ± 0.49 to 3.20 ± 2.58 with P < 0.001), NPRS (from mean of 6.52 ± 2.10 to 5.57 ± 2.17 with P< 0.001), 30CST (from mean of 6.35 ± 4.52 to 7.78 ± 4.40 with P < 0.001), KOOS-KPS (from mean of 58.5 ± 15.6 to 60.7 ± 15.4 with P < 0.001) after completion of all first six sessions of the program. However, no significant difference in KOOS-KP (from mean of 50.2 ± 19.2 to 52.7 ± 19.5 with P < 0.11), KOOS-KQ (from mean of 59.0 ± 16.7 to 61.2 ± 19.5 with P= 0.04) and BMI (from mean of 27.4 ± 4.23 to 27.5 ± 4.24 with P = 0.18).
For the telecare group, significant improvement can be observed in both NGRCS (from mean of 0 ± 0 to 3.17± 2.32 with P < 0.001), NPRS (from mean of 6.18 ± 1.74 to 4.24 ± 1.79 with P< 0.001). Although, BMI (from mean of 26.7 ± 2.91 to 26.6 ± 3.02with P = 0.29), 30CST (from mean of 7.59 ± 4.27 to 8.88 ± 2.62 with P = 0.053), KOOS-KP (from mean of 59.7 ± 14.98 to 63.9 ± 16.87 with P = 0.053), KOOS-KQ (from mean of 41.4 ± 17.3 to 45.4 ± 16.7 with P = 0.136) and KOOS-KPS (from mean of 65.88 ± 10.26 to 75.53 ± 10.26 with P = 0.093) show no significant difference.
The outcome measures of the difference between both face-to-face and telecare groups at 6th sessions were compared as well. There were no significant differences in NGRCS (p = 0.482), NPRS (p = 0.004), BMI (p = 0.130), 30 CST (p = 0.054), KOOS-KP (p = 0.025), KOOS-KPS (p = 0.330) and KOOS-Q (p = 0.092) when comparing both groups.
Our study showed that the face-to-face and telecare physiotherapy services provided to OA knee patients by physiotherapists might be effective in improving the wellness, physical functions and reducing symptoms severity of our patients.
