Understanding telerehabilitation technology to evaluate stakeholders’ adoption of telerehabilitation services: a systematic literature review and directions for further research

Objectives: To examine the adoption of telerehabilitation services from the stakeholders’ perspective and to investigate recent advances and future challenges. Data Sources: A systematic review of English articles indexed by PubMed, Thomson Institute of Scientific Information's Web of Science, and Elsevier's Scopus between 1998 and 2020. Study Selection: The first author (N.N.) screened all titles and abstracts based on the eligibility criteria. Experimental and empirical articles such as randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials, pre-experimental studies, case studies, surveys, feasibility studies, qualitative descriptive studies, and cohort studies were all included in this review. Data Extraction: The first, second, and fourth authors (N.N., W.I., B.N.) independently extracted data using data fields predefined by the third author (M.B.). The data extracted through this review included study objective, study design, purpose of telerehabilitation, telerehabilitation equipment, patient/sample, age, disease, data collection methods, theory/framework, and adoption themes. Data Synthesis: A telerehabilitation adoption process model was proposed to highlight the significance of the readiness stage and to classify the primary studies. The articles were classified based on 6 adoption themes, namely users’ perception, perspective, and experience; users’ satisfaction; users’ acceptance and adherence; TeleRehab usability; individual readiness; and users’ motivation and awareness. Results: A total of 133 of 914 articles met the eligibility criteria. The majority of papers were randomized controlled trials (27%), followed by surveys (15%). Almost 49% of the papers examined the use of telerehabilitation technology in patients with nervous system problems, 23% examined physical disability disorders, 10% examined cardiovascular diseases, and 8% inspected pulmonary diseases. Conclusion: Research on the adoption of telerehabilitation is still in its infancy and needs further attention from researchers working in health care, especially in resource-limited countries. Indeed, studies on the adoption of telerehabilitation are essential to minimize implementation failure, as these studies will help to inform health care personnel and clients about successful adoption strategies