Telemedicine Applications for Cancer Rehabilitation: Scoping Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Cancer is a significant public health issue worldwide. Treatments such as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy often cause psychological and physiological side effects, affecting patients' ability to function and their quality of life (QoL). Physical activity is crucial to cancer rehabilitation, improving physical function and QoL and reducing cancer-related fatigue. However, many patients face barriers to accessing cancer rehabilitation due to socioeconomic factors, transportation issues, and time constraints. Telerehabilitation can potentially overcome these barriers by delivering rehabilitation remotely. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study is to identify how telemedicine is used for the rehabilitation of patients with cancer. METHODS: This scoping review followed recognized frameworks. We conducted an electronic literature search on PubMed for studies published between January 2015 and May 2023. Inclusion criteria were studies reporting physical therapy telerehabilitation interventions for patients with cancer, including randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials, feasibility studies, and usability studies. In total, 21 studies met the criteria and were included in the final review. RESULTS: Our search yielded 37 papers, with 21 included in the final review. Randomized controlled trials comprised 47% (n=10) of the studies, with feasibility studies at 33% (n=7) and usability studies at 19% (n=4). Sample sizes were typically 50 or fewer participants in 57% (n=12) of the reports. Participants were generally aged 65 years or younger (n=17, 81%), with a balanced gender distribution. Organ-specific cancers were the focus of 66% (n=14) of the papers, while 28% (n=6) included patients who were in the posttreatment period. Web-based systems were the most used technology (n=13, 61%), followed by phone call or SMS text messaging-based systems (n=9, 42%) and mobile apps (n=5, 23%). Exercise programs were mainly home based (n=19, 90%) and included aerobic (n=19, 90%), resistance (n=13, 61%), and flexibility training (n=7, 33%). Outcomes included improvements in functional capacity, cognitive functioning, and QoL (n=10, 47%); reductions in pain and hospital length of stay; and enhancements in fatigue, physical and emotional well-being, and anxiety. Positive effects on feasibility (n=3, 14%), acceptability (n=8, 38%), and cost-effectiveness (n=2, 9%) were also noted. Functional outcomes were frequently assessed (n=19, 71%) with tools like the 6-minute walk test and grip strength tests. CONCLUSIONS: Telerehabilitation for patients with cancer is beneficial and feasible, with diverse approaches in study design, technologies, exercises, and outcomes. Future research should focus on developing standardized methodologies, incorporating objective measures, and exploring emerging technologies like virtual reality, wearable or noncontact sensors, and artificial intelligence to optimize telerehabilitation interventions. Addressing these areas can enhance clinical practice and improve outcomes for remote rehabilitation with patients.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,037 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,019 | 0,020 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».