Skip to content
ALL Metrics
-
Views
66
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Study Protocol

Patient and clinician perspectives of online-delivered exercise programmes for chronic musculoskeletal conditions: protocol for a systematic review.

[version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]
PUBLISHED 13 May 2022
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Background: Despite the growing economic and social impact of chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions, there has been low uptake of clinical guidelines for management, owing partly to the negative perceptions of patients and clinicians of their appropriateness and accessibility. Online-delivered exercise programmes (ODEPs) offer an alternative that can reduce costs and offer convenience for those with mobility limitations. As such, investigating participants’ perceptions of such programmes provides insight into the complexity and interplay of factors associated with uptake and optimization of implementation strategies.
Objectives: This study aims to systematically review of the literature of patients’ and clinicians’ perceptions of ODEPs for chronic MSK conditions.
Methods: To ensure the likelihood of identifying all relevant published articles, the following databases will be searched from inception to end of the project: CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE, SportDiscus, AMED, APA PsycArticles, APA PsycInfo, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Included articles will qualitatively and/or quantitatively report the perceptions of participants of ODEPs for chronic MSK conditions. ODEPs are defined as either (a) synchronous, users can exchange information simultaneously, or (b) asynchronous, with at least one synchronous feature, or (c) neither, where the authors investigate a user’s past experiences and/or likelihood of participating in such a programme. Article screening and quality assessment using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklists will be performed by two independent reviewers. All findings from included articles will be extracted and coded using a thematic synthesis approach.
Discussion: It is important to offer diverse resources to address the growing public health burden of chronic MSK conditions. This study will explore patients and clinicians’ perceptions of ODEPs including needs, appropriateness and acceptability. Our findings could be used by policy makers, clinicians, and researchers to generate new models of care that could influence the uptake and long-term sustainability of ODEPs for chronic MSK conditions.
PROSPERO registration: CRD42021273773.

Keywords

Chronic pain, musculoskeletal conditions, online, exercise, digital care, perceptions, patients, clinicians

Introduction

Health conditions that affect bones, ligaments, tendons, nerves, joints, and muscles are often referred to as musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions (El-Tallawy et al., 2021; McMahon et al., 2021). Specifically, chronic MSK conditions are characterized by pain, physical limitations, stiffness and swelling (Briggs et al., 2018; Cottrell et al., 2017a). These conditions are considered as the leading contributors to the global burden of disability with a reported 19.6% increase between 2006 and 2016 in the global disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) (GBD, 2017). Further, the economic, social, and functional impact of chronic MSK conditions has been reported globally with significant costs associated with medical care, lower productivity, loss of wages, emotional wellbeing, and poor quality of life (Breivik et al., 2006; Hagen et al., 2020; McMahon et al., 2021). Current treatment guidelines and interventions recommend non-pharmacological self-management strategies that aim to be preventative and can include education, exercise and following rehabilitation protocols (Lin et al., 2020). However, factors that can influence the uptake of such programmes include the perspectives of patients and clinicians of their effectiveness, accessibility, and flexibility (Hofstede et al., 2016; Turolla et al., 2020; van den Berg et al., 2008; Wade et al., 2014). As such, interventions addressing these factors might encourage adoption and address the global economic and social impact.

The growing burden on healthcare resources from longer waiting lists and those who cannot access care due to their location, work/caring responsibilities or symptoms has led to poor implementation of guidelines and access to treatment (Hunter, 2011; van Beugen et al., 2014). To address this, the interest in and use of digital models of care has increased due to their accessibility and flexibility (Turolla et al., 2020). Further, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has shown that healthcare settings can adapt and offer flexible programmes that can be delivered online. Recent systematic reviews have found that delivering online programmes for the management of chronic MSK conditions is effective and comparable to face-to-face care (Agostini et al., 2015; Cottrell et al., 2017a). For example, trials on telerehabilitation for patients with osteoarthritis (OA) reported clinically meaningful improvements in pain, physical function, quality of life and self-efficacy (Bennell et al., 2017; Bossen et al., 2013; Cuperus et al., 2015; Pignato et al., 2018). However, technical capabilities and access to equipment has led to poor uptake of online programmes (Aily et al., 2020). Additionally, clinician acceptance can influence the development, uptake, and sustainability of telehealth programmes (Wade et al., 2014). Furthermore, the perceptions of clinicians on the effectiveness of interventions are significantly valued and often mirrored by patients’ (Hofstede et al., 2016; Iversen et al., 2004; van den Berg et al., 2008). As global life expectancy and prevalence of chronic MSK conditions continues to grow, we must determine the role of perceptions in the uptake of ODEPs to help address the growing demand for healthcare resources and offer approaches that allow increased participation in timely healthcare.

Methodologically inclusive literature reviews have been used to report perceptions related to health policy and practice (Seaton et al., 2021; Shoesmith et al., 2021). They are appropriate for exploring questions addressing intervention need, appropriateness and acceptability, and allow for primary data from qualitative and quantitative studies to be pulled together to generate new models (Barnett-Page & Thomas, 2009; Tong et al., 2012). Thus, the primary aim of this study is to undertake a review of qualitative and quantitative peer-reviewed literature and synthesise the perceptions of patients and clinicians of ODEPs for chronic MSK conditions. Our secondary aim is to present the common or differing perceptions of patients and clinicians to inform our understanding of the complexity and interplay of factors related to uptake of such programs. Future interventions can adapt our findings to develop implementation strategies to encourage uptake and long-term sustainability for ODEPs for chronic MSK conditions.

Methods

The study has been registered on the PROSPERO database of systematic reviews (registration number CRD42021273773). The reporting of this protocol is in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist (Moher et al., 2015).

Search strategy

A literature search will be conducted using the databases CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE, SportDiscus, and The Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), APA PsycArticles, APA PsycInfo, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. No date limits will be applied. These databases are selected to ensure the likelihood of identifying all the relevant published articles while maintaining a manageable screening load. A Boolean search will be conducted using key search terms. For example: ‘Osteoarthritis or “knee osteoarthritis” or “hip osteoarthritis”’ AND ‘Telerehabilitation or telehealth or telemedicine or online or video or phone or telephone or internet or web’ AND ‘Perception* or experience* or opinion* or attitude* or belief* or view* or perspective*’. The search strategy aims to be a comprehensive gathering of the current state of knowledge around the topic (see Table 1).

Table 1. PICO Framework for Eligibility and Search Terms Used.

PopulationInterventionComparatorOutcome
  •      Osteoarthritis
  •      “Knee osteoarthritis”
  •      “Hip osteoarthritis”
  •      Musculoskeletal
  •      “Chronic pain”
  •      “Chronic knee pain”
  •      “Chronic hip pain”
  •      “Lower limb pain”
  •      “Lower extremity pain”
  •      “Persistent pain”
  •      “Back pain”
  •      Exercis*
  •      Neuromuscular*
  •      Aerobic*
  •      Fitness*
  •      Resistance*
  •      Strength*
  •      Telerehabilitation
  •      Telehealth
  •      Telemedicine
  •      Telemonitoring
  •      Online*
  •      Video*
  •      Internet*
  •      Web*
  •      Digital*
  •      Ehealth
  •      “E-health”
  •      Adopt*
  •      Uptake
  •      Avoid*
  •      Barrier*
  •      Obstacle*
  •      Enable*
  •      Facilitat*
  •      Motivat*
  •      Challeng*
  •      Perception*
  •      Attitude*
  •      Belief*
  •      Experienc*
  •      View*
  •      Opinion*
  •      Accept*
  •      Satisfact*
  •      Feasab*

Eligibility criteria

Studies will be selected for inclusion according to the following criteria (Table 2):

Table 2. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria.

CriteriaInclusionExclusion
LanguageEnglishOther
Date RangeUnlimited-
Sample  •   Service users: People with chronic musculoskeletal conditions (≥18
years)
  •   Service providers including:
PTs, GPs, athletic trainers, community providers
  •   Pediatric population
  •   Non-MSK conditions
  •   Acute MSK injury
SettingPublic or privateOther
Study DesignQualitative, Mixed methods, QuantitativeProtocols, Conferences, Reports,
Abstracts, Case studies, Books,
Chapters, Reviews
Type of programmeChronic musculoskeletal conditions management programmes:
  •   Delivered online synchronously.
  •   Including an exercise or physical activity component.
  •   Designed as (1) synchronous only or (2) hybrid (e.g., asynchronous
+ synchronous features).
  •   Includes at least one synchronous feedback component with a
healthcare professional.
  •   Individual or group based.
Chronic musculoskeletal conditions
management programmes:
  •   Delivered online asynchronously.
  •   Not including an exercise or
physical activity component.
  •   Designed as (1) asynchronous
only or (2) hybrid (e.g.,
asynchronous + in-person).
Type of outcome  •   Anticipated or experienced perceptions, barriers and facilitators
to implementation of online-delivered exercise or physical activity
programmes for chronic musculoskeletal conditions management.
 

Note: PTs: physiotherapists; GPs: general practitioners; MSK: musculoskeletal

Participants

Articles that involve (1) individuals with diagnosed or self-reported chronic MSK conditions (e.g., hip and/or knee osteoarthritis) and/or (2) individuals who provide exercise treatments for chronic MSK conditions (e.g., general practioners (GPs), physiotherapists (PTs)) will be included.

Intervention

Articles will be included if they investigate the perceptions of patients and/or clinicians involved in an online-delivered programme for chronic MSK conditions including an exercise or physical activity component. Further, articles will be included if they utilise either of the following delivery modes: (a) where the program is synchronously delivered implying that all users involved can exchange information simultaneously; (b) where the program is asynchronously delivered (e.g., website with exercise videos) with at least one synchronous feature (e.g., chat function on website or telephone support calls); or (c) where no programme is delivered but the authors investigate a user’s past experiences and/or likelihood of participating in such a program. For the purpose of this review, synchronous features are defined as including some element of human/healthcare professional feedback. Articles will be excluded if they provide synchronous artificial intelligence (AI) feedback.

Study design

Studies will be included if they undertake either (1) a qualitative approach (e.g., semi-structured interviews); (2) a quantitative approach (e.g., cross-sectional survey); or (3) a mixed methods approach, where relevant data is collected via qualitative and/or quantitative approaches.

Study selection

The literature will be stored and organised using the reference management software EndNote X9 (Version 9.3.3). After the initial search, articles will be imported, duplicates will be removed, and relevant titles and abstracts will be screened for eligibility by three independent reviewers. Thereafter, relevant full-text articles will be retrieved and screened for eligibility by two independent reviewers. Quality appraisal will be performed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Checklists (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme, 2018). Studies will be rated as high, medium and low quality if they met ≥8, 5–7 and ≤4 criteria, respectively (Kanavaki et al., 2017). Discrepancies will be resolved by author consensus. The process of study identification and selection will be documented according to a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) compliant flow chart (see Figure 1) (Page et al., 2021).

1f0a01cd-08b6-479b-bc65-c733930a9abf_figure1.gif

Figure 1. Flow diagram of study identification and selection, adapted from PRISMA flow chart (Page et al., 2021).

Data extraction and synthesis

After study selection, all findings from included articles will be synthesised. Data items addressing either the description of or interpretation of participants’ perceptions related to their involvement in an ODEP for chronic MSK conditions will be extracted and managed with a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet (Version 16.47.1). A thematic synthesis approach will be adopted where data items will be coded and organised into descriptive domains, which will then be further refined into analytical domains (Barnett-Page & Thomas, 2009). This is a highly repetitive process and will involve re-examining and refining the domains continuously within the scope of the review. To optimise the applicability of the findings, those perceptions that appear in at least three studies will be included in this review (Kanavaki et al., 2017). Finally, a table will be used to summarise key study characteristics.

Discussion

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), MSK conditions are the leading contributors for the global need for rehabilitation, accounting for 1.71 billion people globally (World Health Organisation, 2021). The direct and indirect economic, social, and functional costs of chronic MSK conditions are immense, with projections showing an increase in prevalence in the future (Cieza et al., 2020; World Health Organisation, 2021). As such, it is important to offer accessible healthcare services that provide a sustainable option to address this growing public health problem.

Current treatment approaches for chronic MSK conditions include offering accessible and flexible ODEPs. However, slow uptake due to patient and clinician perceptions of their effectiveness has led to a gap in evidence-based care and generated an unmet need for rehabilitation globally (Cottrell & Russell, 2020; Wade et al., 2014; Wade et al., 2016). Further, negative perceptions may create barriers to participation in and referral to guideline-based management programmes (Wallis et al., 2020).

Previous research found that patients frequently access medical advice and treatments from clinicians, whose acceptance of telehealth can in turn influence their own acceptance (Cottrell et al., 2017b; Hofstede et al., 2016). This suggests that the perceptions of patients and clinicians are interconnected and can influence each other. Previous systematic reviews investigating the recommended management of chronic MSK conditions have reported on the perceptions of either patients or clinicians. For example, Fernandes et al. (2022) investigated the perceptions and/or experiences of patients with chronic MSK pain related to telehealth pain exercise, education, and self-management strategies. On the other hand, Egerton et al. (2017) investigated the views of primary care clinicians on providing recommended management of OA. Thus, this review builds on previous work to identify evidence on both clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions of telehealth exercise interventions for chronic MSK conditions. We will investigate if and how these interconnected perceptions play a role in telehealth engagement by synthesizing the literature from two perspectives. Furthermore, this review will address both qualitative and quantitative data, allowing for the inclusion of larger or more diverse populations.

Insight into both patient and clinician perceptions could allow for implementation of strategies that use targeted education to address perceptions and can be useful in improving uptake and facilitating recommended practice. Policy makers, clinicians, and researchers may find the perception-centered approach helpful in developing and testing treatments. Future studies could evaluate how this approach is helpful in improving patient and clinician uptake of telehealth for chronic MSK conditions.

This protocol describes a planned systematic review that aims to gather primary data from qualitative and/or quantitative peer-reviewed studies investigating the perceptions of patients and clinicians of ODEPs for chronic MSK conditions. It offers an outline of our objectives and methods, and any deviations will be discussed in the systematic review report. By investigating the perceptions of patients and clinicians, we hope to gain a better understanding of how these perceptions may be shared or influence each other. These findings could assist with the development of evidence-based implementation strategies that aim to deliver consistent and tailored interventions targeting the needs of end-users. This will encourage uptake and long-term improvements in health policies and services.

Dissemination

The systematic review will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and access to the dataset will be available from the corresponding author upon request.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study is a review of the literature and does not involve conducting experimental research or collecting personal data. Thus, ethical approval and consent to participate is not required.

Data availability

Underlying data

No data are associated with this article.

Reporting guidelines

Open Science Framework: PRISMA-P Checklist for “Patient and clinician perspectives of online-delivered exercise programmes for chronic musculoskeletal conditions: protocol for a systematic review”, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/75GVY (Bhardwaj, 2022)

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero "No rights reserved" data waiver (CC0 1.0 Universal).

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 3
VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 13 May 2022
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
VIEWS
1046
 
downloads
66
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Bhardwaj A, Barry Walsh C, Ezzat A et al. Patient and clinician perspectives of online-delivered exercise programmes for chronic musculoskeletal conditions: protocol for a systematic review. [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. HRB Open Res 2022, 5:37 (https://doi.org/10.12688/hrbopenres.13551.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 13 May 2022
Views
42
Cite
Reviewer Report 19 Jun 2023
Daniel Cury Ribeiro, School of Physiotherapy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 42
Feedback
Abstract:

“Despite the growing economic and social impact of chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) conditions, there has been low uptake of clinical guidelines for management, owing partly to the negative perceptions of patients and clinicians of their ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Ribeiro DC. Reviewer Report For: Patient and clinician perspectives of online-delivered exercise programmes for chronic musculoskeletal conditions: protocol for a systematic review. [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. HRB Open Res 2022, 5:37 (https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14793.r34152)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 20 Nov 2023
    Avantika Bhardwaj, School of Allied Health, Faculty of Education & Health Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland
    20 Nov 2023
    Author Response
    • Low uptake of clinical guidelines for the management of chronic MSK conditions is partly due to the negative perceptions of patients and clinicians of their appropriateness (cost is
    ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 20 Nov 2023
    Avantika Bhardwaj, School of Allied Health, Faculty of Education & Health Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland
    20 Nov 2023
    Author Response
    • Low uptake of clinical guidelines for the management of chronic MSK conditions is partly due to the negative perceptions of patients and clinicians of their appropriateness (cost is
    ... Continue reading
Views
55
Cite
Reviewer Report 06 Jun 2023
G Shankar Ganesh, Integral University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India 
Approved with Reservations
VIEWS 55
A protocol's main function is to clearly and transparently describe the systematic review procedure to readers and reviewers. The protocol should provide vivid information on:
the review's objectives and research questions, PICO analysis being employed, a clear description of ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Ganesh GS. Reviewer Report For: Patient and clinician perspectives of online-delivered exercise programmes for chronic musculoskeletal conditions: protocol for a systematic review. [version 1; peer review: 2 approved with reservations]. HRB Open Res 2022, 5:37 (https://doi.org/10.21956/hrbopenres.14793.r34157)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
  • Author Response 20 Nov 2023
    Avantika Bhardwaj, School of Allied Health, Faculty of Education & Health Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland
    20 Nov 2023
    Author Response
    • The current systematic review aims to address important gaps in the existing literature. Previous reviews focused on different aspects of patient and clinician perceptions of online-delivered exercise programmes
    ... Continue reading
COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT
  • Author Response 20 Nov 2023
    Avantika Bhardwaj, School of Allied Health, Faculty of Education & Health Sciences, University of Limerick, Limerick, V94 T9PX, Ireland
    20 Nov 2023
    Author Response
    • The current systematic review aims to address important gaps in the existing literature. Previous reviews focused on different aspects of patient and clinician perceptions of online-delivered exercise programmes
    ... Continue reading

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 3
VERSION 3 PUBLISHED 13 May 2022
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Are you a HRB-funded researcher?

Submission to HRB Open Research is open to all HRB grantholders or people working on a HRB-funded/co-funded grant on or since 1 January 2017. Sign up for information about developments, publishing and publications from HRB Open Research.

You must provide your first name
You must provide your last name
You must provide a valid email address
You must provide an institution.

Thank you!

We'll keep you updated on any major new updates to HRB Open Research

Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.