Introduction: The rapid adoption of telerehabilitation in physiotherapy and occupational therapy has transformed healthcare delivery, offering new opportunities for patient-centered care. However, its implementation raises critical ethical and equity-related questions that require proactive strategies to ensure fair and responsible practices. This review examines how ethical disparities and equity-related challenges are reflected in the existing literature on telerehabilitation. Objective: To investigate the presence of ethical-disparity and equity-related aspects in the provision of telerehabilitation in physiotherapy and occupational therapy as reflected in the literature. Data Sources: A rapid review methodology was employed to explore ethical and equity-related challenges in telerehabilitation. The search included articles published in English and French between 2010 and 2023 from the Medline and Embase databases. Study Selection: Articles were selected based on their relevance to ethical and equity considerations in telerehabilitation. A total of 1750 sources were initially identified, with 67 articles meeting the eligibility criteria for inclusion in this review. Data Extraction: Data were extracted based on variables such as age, gender, ethnicity, morbidity, cost, privacy, confidentiality, and autonomy. The data extraction and analysis were guided by the Progress Plus and Metaverse Equitable Rehabilitation Therapy frameworks. Data Synthesis: The findings were analyzed and discussed using a narrative synthesis approach. The results highlighted key ethical considerations, including adverse events, patient autonomy, and privacy issues. Equity-related aspects were examined, access to rehabilitation services and gender considerations. Disparities in technology access, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity were also identified. Conclusions: This rapid review highlights the growing relevance of ethical and equity considerations in the design and delivery of telerehabilitation within physiotherapy and occupational therapy. The findings show inconsistent reporting and limited depth in addressing key domains such as patient autonomy, privacy, and adverse events, alongside disparities related to age, gender, socioeconomic status, and geographic access. Although telerehabilitation holds promise for expanding access, particularly in underserved areas, this potential remains unevenly realized. The review underscores the critical need for structured, equity-driven, and ethically grounded frameworks such as the Metaverse Equitable Rehabilitation THerapy (MERTH) framework to guide future implementation, research, and policy.

Introduction: The rapid adoption of telerehabilitation in physiotherapy and occupational therapy has transformed healthcare delivery, offering new opportunities for patient-centered care. However, its implementation raises critical ethical and equity-related questions that must be addressed to ensure fair and responsible practices. This review examines how ethical disparities and equity-related challenges are reflected in the existing literature on telerehabilitation. Objective: To investigate the presence of ethical-disparity and equity-related aspects in the provision of telerehabilitation in physiotherapy and occupational therapy as reflected in the literature. Methods: A rapid review methodology was employed to explore ethical and equity-related challenges in telerehabilitation. The search included articles published in English and French between 2010 and 2020 from the Medline and Embase databases. Articles were selected based on their relevance to ethical and equity considerations in telerehabilitation. A total of 1,556 sources were initially identified, with 57 articles meeting the eligibility criteria for inclusion in this review. Data were extracted based on variables such as age, gender, ethnicity, morbidity, cost, privacy, confidentiality, and autonomy. The data extraction and analysis were guided by the Progress Plus and Metaverse Equitable Rehabilitation Therapy frameworks. A narrative synthesis approach was used to analyze and discuss the findings. The results highlighted key ethical considerations, including adverse events, patient autonomy, and privacy issues. Equity-related aspects were examined with a significant focus on age demographics, access to rehabilitation services, and gender considerations. Disparities in technology access, socioeconomic status, and ethnicity were also identified. Conclusions: The review underscores the importance of addressing ethical and equity-related issues in telerehabilitation to ensure a socially just, responsible, and inclusive approach to care. Additionally, it highlights the potential for telerehabilitation to offer personalized interventions that cater to individual patient needs, further advancing equitable and patient-centered rehabilitation practices.

Background/Objective: Over the past two decades, the utilization of virtual care in rehabilitation has witnessed a significant surge; this is owing to the widespread availability of technological tools and the global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, discussions surrounding the relevance and benefits of telerehabilitation have gained prominence among practitioners, who continually seek to enhance patient care while maintaining high standards of quality. Associated with these discussions are concerns over being able to provide care in an ethical way, as well as addressing equity issues that might be hindered or improved via telerehabilitation. To address the ethical and equity concerns around telerehabilitation, a series of five parallel rapid reviews of the scientific literature were conducted, focusing on different rehabilitation fields: physiotherapy and occupational therapy (1); speech therapy and audiology (2); psychology and neuropsychology (3); and in two age groups: older adults (4); and pediatrics and young adults (5). The objective of this series of rapid reviews is to evaluate the evidence presented regarding telerehabilitation; identifying and recommending best practices especially in the realm of ethics and equity. Methods: Medline; CINAHL; and EMBASE were searched between 2010 and 2023 for English or French-language reviews (2010–2020) and individual studies (2020–2023) pertaining to telerehabilitation and these fields of interest. Data were extracted following a standardized form focusing on: outcomes; findings; quality assessment/biases; limitations; and discussion of ethical and equity concerns. Results: The results are presented according to the most relevant themes, which include: findings; strengths; limitations; and ethical/equity considerations. Conclusions: This research presents a methodology rarely published before, on how to conduct multiple parallel rapid reviews on the theme of telerehabilitation, based on different rehabilitation fields and age groups. This research will shape future guidelines and standards in applying ethical and equity standards in telerehabilitation.