Digital physiotherapy assessment vs conventional face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of patients with musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review

PLoS One. 2023 Mar 21;18(3):e0283013. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0283013. eCollection 2023.

Abstract

Background: This systematic review aimed to assess the certainty of evidence for digital versus conventional, face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of musculoskeletal disorders, concerning validity, reliability, feasibility, patient satisfaction, physiotherapist satisfaction, adverse events, clinical management, and cost-effectiveness.

Methods: Eligibility criteria: Original studies comparing digital physiotherapy assessment with face-to-face physiotherapy assessment of musculoskeletal disorders. Systematic database searches were performed in May 2021, and updated in May 2022, in Medline, Cochrane Library, Cinahl, AMED, and PEDro. Risk of bias and applicability of the included studies were appraised using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool and the Quality Appraisal of Reliability Studies tool. Included studies were synthesised narratively. Certainty of evidence was evaluated for each assessment component using GRADE.

Results: Ten repeated-measures studies were included, involving 193 participants aged 23-62 years. Reported validity of digital physiotherapy assessment ranged from moderate/acceptable to almost perfect/excellent for clinical tests, range of motion, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), pain, neck posture, and management decisions. Reported validity for assessing spinal posture varied and was for clinical observations unacceptably low. Reported validity and reliability for digital diagnosis ranged from moderate to almost perfect for exact+similar agreement, but was considerably lower when constrained to exact agreement. Reported reliability was excellent for digital assessment of clinical tests, range of motion, pain, neck posture, and PROMs. Certainty of evidence varied from very low to high, with PROMs and pain assessment obtaining the highest certainty. Patients were satisfied with their digital assessment, but did not perceive it as good as face-to-face assessment.

Discussion: Evidence ranging from very low to high certainty suggests that validity and reliability of digital physiotherapy assessments are acceptable to excellent for several assessment components. Digital physiotherapy assessment may be a viable alternative to face-to-face assessment for patients who are likely to benefit from the accessibility and convenience of remote access.

Trial registration: The review was registered in the PROSPERO database, CRD42021277624.

Publication types

  • Systematic Review
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Humans
  • Musculoskeletal Diseases* / diagnosis
  • Musculoskeletal Diseases* / therapy
  • Neck Pain*
  • Patient Satisfaction
  • Physical Therapy Modalities
  • Reproducibility of Results

Grants and funding

The study was partially supported by Research, Education, Development and Innovation primary care, Region Västra Götaland, Sweden. They had no role in the study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Open Access funding was provided by the University of Gothenburg Library.