41
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares

      Submit your digital health research with an established publisher
      - celebrating 25 years of open access

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Technologies to Support Assessment of Movement During Video Consultations: Exploratory Study

      research-article
      , PhD 1 , , , BSc, MRES 2 , , MSc 1 , , PhD 2 , , PhD 2 , 3 , , BSc 4 , , PhD 1 , , PhD 2 , , BSc 2 , , PhD 2 , , BSc 2 , , MSc 5 , , BSc 2 , , BSc 6 , , PhD 2 , , PhD 2
      (Reviewer), (Reviewer), (Reviewer)
      JMIRx Med
      JMIR Publications
      tele-rehabilitation, video-consultations, assessment of movement, eHealth, technology, desktop robots, wide-angle webcams, physical health, rehabilitation, remote, assessment, assistive technology, evaluation, framework, webcam, telehealth, robots

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Understanding and assessing patients’ body movements is essential for physical rehabilitation but is challenging in video consultations, as clinicians are frequently unable to see the whole patient or observe the patient as they perform specific movements.

          Objective

          The objective of this exploratory study was to assess the use of readily available technologies that would enable remote assessment of patient movement as part of a video consultation.

          Methods

          We reviewed the literature and available technologies and chose four technologies (Kubi and Pivo desktop robots, Facebook Portal TV, wide-angle webcam), in addition to help from a friend or a simple mobile phone holder, to assist video consultations. We used 5 standard assessments (sit-to-stand, timed “Up & Go,” Berg Balance Test, ankle range of motion, shoulder range of motion) as the “challenge” for the technology. We developed an evaluation framework of 6 items: efficacy, cost, delivery, patient setup, clinician training and guidance, and safety. The coauthors, including 10 physiotherapists, then took the roles of clinician and patient to explore 7 combinations of 5 technologies. Subsequently, we applied our findings to hypothetical patients based on the researchers’ family members and clinical experience.

          Results

          Kubi, which allowed the clinician to remotely control the patient’s device, was useful for repositioning the tablet camera to gain a better view of the patient’s body parts but not for tracking movement. Facebook Portal TV was useful, but only for upper body movement, as it functions based on face tracking. Both Pivo, with automated full body tracking using a mobile phone, and the wide-angle webcam for a laptop or desktop computer show promise. Simple solutions such as having a friend operate a mobile phone and use of a mobile phone holder also have potential. The setup of these technologies will require better instructions than are currently available from suppliers, and successful use will depend on the technology readiness of patients and, to some degree, of clinicians.

          Conclusions

          Technologies that may enable clinicians to assess movement remotely as part of video consultations depend on the interplay of technology readiness, the patient’s clinical conditions, and social support. The most promising off-the-shelf approaches seem to be use of wide-angle webcams, Pivo, help from a friend, or a simple mobile phone holder. Collaborative work between patients and clinicians is needed to develop and trial technological solutions to support video consultations assessing movement.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The psychometric properties and clinical utility of measures of walking and mobility in neurological conditions: a systematic review.

          To identify psychometrically robust and clinically feasible measures of walking and mobility in people with neurological conditions. MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PEDro and AMED. Independent reviewers selected and extracted data from articles that assessed the reliability, validity, sensitivity to change or clinical utility of measures of walking and mobility in adult neurological conditions. Measures with 'good' psychometrics and 9/10 clinical utility scores were recommended. Seventeen measures were selected. Of these, the 5-m and 10-m walk tests, six-minute walk test, High Level Mobility Assessment Tool (HiMAT) and the Rivermead Mobility Index (RMI) reached the required standards and are usable in clinical practice. None of the recommended measures assessed wheelchair mobility. The least frequently assessed property was sensitivity to change. Further measures could be recommended if the minimal detectable change were demonstrated. The 5-m, 10-m and six-minute walk test, High Level Mobility Assessment Tool and the Rivermead Mobility Index are psychometrically robust measures of walking and mobility and are feasible for use in clinical practice.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            ‘It’s not hands-on therapy, so it’s very limited’: Telehealth use and views among allied health clinicians during the coronavirus pandemic ☆

            Background Telehealth services have helped enable continuity of care during the coronavirus pandemic. We aimed to investigate use and views towards telehealth among allied health clinicians treating people with musculoskeletal conditions during the pandemic. Methods Cross-sectional international survey of allied health clinicians who used telehealth to manage musculoskeletal conditions during the coronavirus pandemic. Questions covered demographics, clinician-related factors (e.g. profession, clinical experience and setting), telehealth use (e.g. proportion of caseload, treatments used), attitudes towards telehealth (Likert scale), and perceived barriers and enablers (open questions). Data were presented descriptively, and an inductive qualitative thematic content analysis approach was used for qualitative data, based on the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation Behavioural Model. Results 827 clinicians participated, mostly physiotherapists (82%) working in Australia (70%). Most (71%, 587/827) reported reduced revenue (mean (SD) 62% (24.7%)) since the pandemic commenced. Median proportion of people seen via telehealth increased from 0% pre (IQR 0 to 1) to 60% during the pandemic (IQR 10 to 100). Most clinicians reported managing common musculoskeletal conditions via telehealth. Less than half (42%) of clinicians surveyed believed telehealth was as effective as face-to-face care. A quarter or less believed patients value telehealth to the same extent (25%), or that they have sufficient telehealth training (21%). Lack of physical contact when working through telehealth was perceived to hamper accurate and effective diagnosis and management. Conclusion Although telehealth was adopted by allied health clinicians during the coronavirus pandemic, we identified barriers that may limit continued telehealth use among allied health clinicians beyond the current pandemic.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found
              Is Open Access

              What matters to older people with assisted living needs? A phenomenological analysis of the use and non-use of telehealth and telecare.

              Telehealth and telecare research has been dominated by efficacy trials. The field lacks a sophisticated theorisation of [a] what matters to older people with assisted living needs; [b] how illness affects people's capacity to use technologies; and [c] the materiality of assistive technologies. We sought to develop a phenomenologically and socio-materially informed theoretical model of assistive technology use. Forty people aged 60-98 (recruited via NHS, social care and third sector) were visited at home several times in 2011-13. Using ethnographic methods, we built a detailed picture of participants' lives, illness experiences and use (or non-use) of technologies. Data were analysed phenomenologically, drawing on the work of Heidegger, and contextualised using a structuration approach with reference to Bourdieu's notions of habitus and field. We found that participants' needs were diverse and unique. Each had multiple, mutually reinforcing impairments (e.g. tremor and visual loss and stiff hands) that were steadily worsening, culturally framed and bound up with the prospect of decline and death. They managed these conditions subjectively and experientially, appropriating or adapting technologies so as to enhance their capacity to sense and act on their world. Installed assistive technologies met few participants' needs; some devices had been abandoned and a few deliberately disabled. Successful technology arrangements were often characterised by 'bricolage' (pragmatic customisation, combining new with legacy devices) by the participant or someone who knew and cared about them. With few exceptions, the current generation of so-called 'assisted living technologies' does not assist people to live with illness. To overcome this irony, technology providers need to move beyond the goal of representing technology users informationally (e.g. as biometric data) to providing flexible components from which individuals and their carers can 'think with things' to improve the situated, lived experience of multi-morbidity. A radical revision of assistive technology design policy may be needed. Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                JMIRx Med
                JMIRx Med
                JMIRxMed
                JMIRx Med
                JMIR Publications (Toronto, Canada )
                2563-6316
                Jul-Sep 2021
                24 September 2021
                : 2
                : 3
                : e30233
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Centre for Health Technology University of Plymouth Plymouth United Kingdom
                [2 ] School of Health Professions University of Plymouth Plymouth United Kingdom
                [3 ] Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust Exeter United Kingdom
                [4 ] Royal Cornwall Hospital Trust Truro United Kingdom
                [5 ] Liskeard Community Hospital Liskeard United Kingdom
                [6 ] Mount Gould Hospital Plymouth United Kingdom
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Ray B Jones ray.jones@ 123456plymouth.ac.uk
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2963-3421
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9829-5617
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3800-9724
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0149-5477
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8776-1114
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9792-5565
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9103-1069
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4471-756X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7866-4825
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8027-1665
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1296-108X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7809-5765
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0400-0502
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6529-4893
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2215-5516
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4072-9758
                Article
                v2i3e30233
                10.2196/30233
                10414296
                37725550
                37a9de9e-c332-47f3-a1cb-d1bbbb4d678c
                ©Ray B Jones, Suzanne Hubble, Lloyd Taylor, Hilary Gunn, Angela Logan, Tim Rowland, Hannah Bradwell, Luke J Connolly, Kim Algie, Krithika Anil, Bradley Halliday, Sandra Houston, Rachel Dennett, Sarah Chatfield, Sarah Buckingham, Jennifer Freeman. Originally published in JMIRx Med (https://med.jmirx.org), 24.09.2021.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work, first published in JMIRx Med, is properly cited. The complete bibliographic information, a link to the original publication on https://med.jmirx.org/, as well as this copyright and license information must be included.

                History
                : 6 May 2021
                : 4 June 2021
                : 8 June 2021
                : 13 June 2021
                Categories
                Original Paper
                Original Paper

                tele-rehabilitation,video-consultations,assessment of movement,ehealth,technology,desktop robots,wide-angle webcams,physical health,rehabilitation,remote,assessment,assistive technology,evaluation,framework,webcam,telehealth,robots

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                Related Documents Log