Analysis of the application effect of new rehabilitation nursing methods in orthopedic postoperative rehabilitation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare Pub Date : 2026-09-01 Epub Date: 2026-01-12 DOI:10.1177/1357633X251408308
Fan Cao, Lingyun Shi, Xiao Wang
{"title":"Analysis of the application effect of new rehabilitation nursing methods in orthopedic postoperative rehabilitation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Fan Cao, Lingyun Shi, Xiao Wang","doi":"10.1177/1357633X251408308","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveTo quantify the impact of technology-enabled rehabilitation nursing on patient-reported function after lower-limb arthroplasty and to explore effect modification by surgical procedure and by technological modality.MethodsTen databases were searched from inception to 2 May 2025. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing an innovative digital or electromechanical rehabilitation intervention with usual postoperative care and reporting WOMAC, KOOS or HOOS outcomes were eligible. Risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane RoB 2.0. Standardised mean differences (Hedges g) were pooled using a Hartung-Knapp REML random-effects model; heterogeneity was quantified with I<sup>2</sup>. Sub-group analyses were prespecified for surgery type (TKA vs THA) and technology class (virtual reality VR, web/app telerehabilitation WB, robot/sensor RB). Publication bias was evaluated with funnel-plot inspection and Egger's regression. The certainty of evidence was assessed with the GRADE framework.ResultsFifteen RCTs (1012 experimental, 954 control participants; 11 TKA, 3 THA, 1 mixed) met the criteria and were all rated overall \"low risk\" by RoB 2.0. Across trials, technology-enabled care conferred a small but significant improvement in patient-reported function (g = 0.28; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.56; p = 0.049; I<sup>2</sup> = 86%). VR produced the largest point estimate (g = 0.62; 95% CI -0.18 to 1.41; 4 trials); WB yielded a modest, non-significant benefit (g = 0.18; 95% CI -0.24 to 0.59; 8 trials); RB showed a comparable, non-significant effect (g = 0.14; 95% CI -0.23 to 0.50; 3 trials). The χ<sup>2</sup> test for subgroup differences was not significant (p = 0.16). Egger's test revealed no evidence of small-study effects (p = 0.73). Leave-one-out and influence analyses confirmed robustness of the pooled estimate. The certainty of evidence was rated as moderate (GRADE).ConclusionsNext-generation digital and electromechanical rehabilitation programmes achieve at least non-inferior- and potentially clinically relevant-improvements in self-reported function after lower-limb arthroplasty while reducing in-person therapist time. Virtual-reality platforms appear most promising, but heterogeneity suggests that dose, feedback fidelity and sensor precision are key effect drivers. Large, standardised multicentre trials with cost-utility endpoints are needed to clarify which technological components add value for which patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":50024,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","volume":" ","pages":"641-653"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1357633X251408308","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveTo quantify the impact of technology-enabled rehabilitation nursing on patient-reported function after lower-limb arthroplasty and to explore effect modification by surgical procedure and by technological modality.MethodsTen databases were searched from inception to 2 May 2025. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing an innovative digital or electromechanical rehabilitation intervention with usual postoperative care and reporting WOMAC, KOOS or HOOS outcomes were eligible. Risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane RoB 2.0. Standardised mean differences (Hedges g) were pooled using a Hartung-Knapp REML random-effects model; heterogeneity was quantified with I2. Sub-group analyses were prespecified for surgery type (TKA vs THA) and technology class (virtual reality VR, web/app telerehabilitation WB, robot/sensor RB). Publication bias was evaluated with funnel-plot inspection and Egger's regression. The certainty of evidence was assessed with the GRADE framework.ResultsFifteen RCTs (1012 experimental, 954 control participants; 11 TKA, 3 THA, 1 mixed) met the criteria and were all rated overall "low risk" by RoB 2.0. Across trials, technology-enabled care conferred a small but significant improvement in patient-reported function (g = 0.28; 95% CI 0.00 to 0.56; p = 0.049; I2 = 86%). VR produced the largest point estimate (g = 0.62; 95% CI -0.18 to 1.41; 4 trials); WB yielded a modest, non-significant benefit (g = 0.18; 95% CI -0.24 to 0.59; 8 trials); RB showed a comparable, non-significant effect (g = 0.14; 95% CI -0.23 to 0.50; 3 trials). The χ2 test for subgroup differences was not significant (p = 0.16). Egger's test revealed no evidence of small-study effects (p = 0.73). Leave-one-out and influence analyses confirmed robustness of the pooled estimate. The certainty of evidence was rated as moderate (GRADE).ConclusionsNext-generation digital and electromechanical rehabilitation programmes achieve at least non-inferior- and potentially clinically relevant-improvements in self-reported function after lower-limb arthroplasty while reducing in-person therapist time. Virtual-reality platforms appear most promising, but heterogeneity suggests that dose, feedback fidelity and sensor precision are key effect drivers. Large, standardised multicentre trials with cost-utility endpoints are needed to clarify which technological components add value for which patients.

新型康复护理方法在骨科术后康复中的应用效果分析:随机对照试验的系统回顾与meta分析。
目的量化技术康复护理对下肢关节置换术后患者报告功能的影响,并探讨手术方式和技术方式对效果的影响。方法从数据库建立至2025年5月2日检索。比较创新的数字或机电康复干预与常规术后护理并报告WOMAC、oos或HOOS结果的随机对照试验(rct)是合格的。采用Cochrane RoB 2.0评估偏倚风险。采用Hartung-Knapp REML随机效应模型汇总标准化平均差异(Hedges g);用I2定量分析异质性。预先指定手术类型(TKA vs THA)和技术类别(虚拟现实VR,网络/应用远程康复WB,机器人/传感器RB)的亚组分析。采用漏斗图检验和Egger回归评价发表偏倚。使用GRADE框架评估证据的确定性。结果15项随机对照试验(试验组1012例,对照组954例,TKA组11例,THA组3例,混合组1例)符合标准,均被RoB 2.0评为整体“低风险”。在所有试验中,技术支持的护理对患者报告的功能有微小但显著的改善(g = 0.28; 95% CI 0.00至0.56;p = 0.049; I2 = 86%)。VR产生了最大的点估计(g = 0.62; 95% CI -0.18至1.41;4次试验);WB产生了适度的、不显著的获益(g = 0.18; 95% CI -0.24至0.59;8项试验);RB显示出可比性的、非显著的影响(g = 0.14; 95% CI -0.23 ~ 0.50; 3项试验)。亚组间χ2检验差异无统计学意义(p = 0.16)。埃格检验没有发现小规模研究效应的证据(p = 0.73)。留一分析和影响分析证实了合并估计的稳健性。证据的确定性被评为中度(GRADE)。结论:下一代数字和机电康复方案至少在下肢关节置换术后自我报告功能方面取得了非次等的改善,并且可能具有临床相关性,同时减少了亲自治疗的时间。虚拟现实平台似乎最有希望,但异质性表明,剂量、反馈保真度和传感器精度是关键的影响因素。需要有成本效用终点的大型标准化多中心试验,以明确哪些技术组件对哪些患者增加了价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.10
自引率
10.60%
发文量
174
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare provides excellent peer reviewed coverage of developments in telemedicine and e-health and is now widely recognised as the leading journal in its field. Contributions from around the world provide a unique perspective on how different countries and health systems are using new technology in health care. Sections within the journal include technology updates, editorials, original articles, research tutorials, educational material, review articles and reports from various telemedicine organisations. A subscription to this journal will help you to stay up-to-date in this fast moving and growing area of medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书