Objectives: To determine whether allied health interventions delivered using telehealth provide similar or better outcomes for patients compared with traditional face-to-face delivery modes. Study design: A rapid systematic review using the Cochrane methodology to extract eligible randomized trials. Eligible trials: Trials were eligible for inclusion if they compared a comparable dose of face-to-face to telehealth interventions delivered by a neuropsychologist, occupational therapist, physiotherapist, podiatrist, psychologist, and/or speech pathologist; reported patient-level outcomes; and included adult participants. Data sources: MEDLINE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and EMBASE databases were first searched from inception for systematic reviews and eligible trials were extracted from these systematic reviews. These databases were then searched for randomized clinical trials published after the date of the most recent systematic review search in each discipline (2017). The reference lists of included trials were also hand-searched to identify potentially missed trials. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool Version 1. Data Synthesis: Fifty-two trials (62 reports, n = 4470) met the inclusion criteria. Populations included adults with musculoskeletal conditions, stroke, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and/or pain. Synchronous and asynchronous telehealth approaches were used with varied modalities that included telephone, videoconferencing, apps, web portals, and remote monitoring, Overall, telehealth delivered similar improvements to face-to-face interventions for knee range, Health-Related Quality of Life, pain, language function, depression, anxiety, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. This meta-analysis was limited for some outcomes and disciplines such as occupational therapy and speech pathology. Telehealth was safe and similar levels of satisfaction and adherence were found across modes of delivery and disciplines compared to face-to-face interventions. Conclusions: Many allied health interventions are equally as effective as face-to-face when delivered via telehealth. Incorporating telehealth into models of care may afford greater access to allied health professionals, however further comparative research is still required. In particular, significant gaps exist in our understanding of the efficacy of telehealth from podiatrists, occupational therapists, speech pathologists, and neuropsychologists. Protocol Registration Number: PROSPERO (CRD42020203128).

Background: Less than half of stroke survivors will be able to use their arm at 6 months post-stroke. Guidelines recommend the use of intensive upper limb exercise programs to optimize recovery; however, there has been limited research exploring experiences of participation in intensive programs. Aim: To identify factors influencing adherence to an intensive upper limb exercise program in people with stroke.Methods: Qualitative design. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 stroke survivors who had participated in an intensive upper limb program. Perspectives of participation, including perceived barriers and enablers to program adherence were explored. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and imported into NVivo for analysis. Two authors mapped themes to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behavior (COM-B) behavior change model to identify barriers and enablers to adherence.Results: Enablers influencing adherence included: 1) routine practice times (Motivation – automatic); 2) accountability to staff (Motivation – reflective); and 3) social support (Opportunity – social). Barriers to adherence included: 1) exercises being too difficult (Capability - physical); 2) reliance on others to help (Capability - physical); and 3) difficulty ‘fitting it in’ (Motivation – reflective).Conclusion: Findings will inform recommendations for the delivery of intensive upper limb exercise programs to improve adherence and assist services to provide rehabilitation in a manner that enables self-directed practice by stroke survivors.

Aim: To explore the experiences of adults who completed a constraint-induced movement therapy (CIMT) programme, and the barriers and enablers to their participation.Methods: Qualitative design using semi-structured interviews. Stroke and brain injury survivors (n= 45) who had completed CIMT as part of their usual rehabilitation were interviewed 1 month post-CIMT. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and imported into Nvivo for analysis. Inductive coding was used to identify initial themes. Themes were then deductively mapped to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation – Behaviour system, a behaviour change model, to identify barriers and enablers to CIMT programme adherence and engagement.Results: Enablers influencing participation included being provided with education about the programme (Capability – psychological), seeing improvements in arm function (Motivation – reflective), being committed to the programme (Motivation – reflective) and having strong social support from staff, family and allied health students (Opportunity – social). The structured programme was a motivator and offered a way to fill the time, particularly during inpatient rehabilitation (Opportunity – physical). Barriers to participation included experiencing physical and mental fatigue (Capability – physical) and frustration early in the CIMT programme (Motivation – automatic), and finding exercises boring and repetitive (Motivation – automatic).Conclusion: Therapist provision of educational supports for CIMT participants and their families is important to maximise CIMT programme uptake. During CIMT delivery, we recommend the provision of positive feedback and coaching in alignment with CIMT principles, and the inclusion of social supports such as group-based programmes to enhance participant adherence.