Abstract
Telemedicine and digital health represent alternative approaches for clinical practice; indeed, its potential in healthcare services for prevention, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, and disease monitoring is widely acknowledged. These are all crucial issues to consider when dealing with chronic Rheumatic and Musculoskeletal Diseases (RMDs). The aim was to determine the current state of telemedicine in the field of rheumatology, considering the tools and devices in use as well as the Patient Reported Outcomes. A scoping review was performed following the PRISMA-ScR, retrieving articles through five databases from 1990 to 2022. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (I) adult patients with RMDs, (II) original research papers in the English language with available abstracts, and (III) telehealth and telemedicine are provided as healthcare services. Within the 62 included studies, multiple tools of telemedicine were used: 21/62 websites/online platforms, 18/62 mobile applications, 16/62 telephone contacts, 5/62 video-consultations, and 1/62 wearable devices. Outcomes were classified based on the economic, clinical, and humanistic framework. Clinical outcomes assessed through digital tools were pain, disease activity, and serum uric acid levels. Humanistic outcomes have been grouped according to four categories (e.g., mental and physical function, health management, and health perception). The heterogeneity of digital tools in the field of rheumatology highlights the challenge of implementing reliable research into clinical practice. Effective telerehabilitation models have been presented, and the use of a tight control strategy has also been mentioned. Future research should focus on establishing studies on other RMDs as well as summarizing and formulating clinical guidelines for RMDs.
Key Points |
• Evidence for the usefulness of telemedicine and digital health for managing and monitoring rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases is progressively increasing. • Several digital tools effectively measure clinical and humanistic and patient reported outcomes in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. • Integrating diverse digital tools in rheumatology is challenging yet promising. • Future research should focus on developing standardized recommendations for practical use of telemedicine in daily practice. |
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
About 1.71 billion of the global population is affected by rheumatic musculoskeletal diseases (RMDs), leading to disability, mortality, and morbidity [1, 2]. Almost one-third of the general population experience a problem linked to RMDs, with a prevalence that ranges from 9.8% to 33.2% [3]. The WHO reports that RMDs alone account for half of all chronic diseases, especially in older adults, and are the primary cause of pain and disability in Europe [4]. In Italy, 27% out of the 60 million adults more than 5 million experience chronic pain and is diagnosed with a RMD [5]. In the last decades, epidemiological data about RMDs has shown an increase due to population aging, higher survival rates, and the spread of early diagnosis. Consequently, an increasing pressure is generated on healthcare services, delaying in some cases the implementation of valid clinical guidelines [6,7,8,9]. In the majority of RMDs, chronicity is a key aspect, requiring intensive patients’ monitoring and regular follow-ups, that sometimes can be effectively delivered also through telehealth tools with successful results in terms of user’s outcomes (i.e., self-care, engagement, satisfaction) [10,11,12].
The active involvement of patients in the collection of data about their health outcomes through the Patients Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) is a significant option within busy health services and from the perspective of patient empowerment [3]. In addition, periods of disease remission favored by therapeutic innovation/biological therapy allow for patients remote monitoring with specific characteristics of clinical stability (i.e., low disease activity or disease remission) and established diagnosis in some settings, like the outpatient clinics [8, 9, 12].
The advancement of telemedicine (TM) in rheumatology facilitates the provision of services such as prevention, diagnosis, treatment, rehabilitation, and follow-up, lessening the burden of the disease from the patients and care-givers perspective, yet some aspects still remain to be better defined [11]. The term “telehealth” refers to a wider range of non-physician services, including TM, telenursing, telepharmacy, and linguistic interpretation, as well as analog and audio–video out-of-office visits as alternatives to in-person healthcare. These terms can be used interchangeably with integrated remote care modalities, including mobile health and E-health platforms [13]. Specifically, the term e-Health has been used since 1990s to refer to the use of information and communication technology to support, improve, or provide access to knowledge and services in healthcare settings [14]. However, nowadays, it has come to refer to all services, goods, procedures, and infrastructures related to digitization in the healthcare industry [15].
Tele-rheumatology originated prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, yet it has played a crucial role with widespread utilization specifically during the pandemic, preventing the discontinuation of clinical care and helping to avoid patients’ isolation [15, 16].
During lockdown periods, authors from Asia, Europe, and the USA reported that the amount of remote and telematic healthcare provided to RMDs patients increased from 50 to 150% [8, 17,18,19,20]. According to Metha et al., 98% of rheumatologists modified their clinical practices during the pandemic, and 82% of them continue to use TM to guarantee continuity of care [21]. During that time, telemedicine also prevented contact between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients, which decreased the risk of cross-infection in hospitals and contagion anxiety among the population [22].
At the best of our knowledge, with an exponential increase in published research on telemedicine, there is a great study heterogeneity in terms of methods and digital tools used, making implications and recommendations for clinical practice challenging to produce. Thus, the aim of the present scoping review is to identify the state of the art of the role of telemedicine in the field of rheumatology, with reference to the device used and PROs included by the authors.
Materials and methods
This scoping review was conducted following approaches outlined by Arksey and O’Malley and Levac et al., which provide a clear and rapid overview of relevant information regarding the telemedicine’s role in rheumatology [22, 23]. The scoping review protocol was developed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) [24]. Ethical approval was not sought as the data were publicly available.
The team conducted this scoping review through the following phases: (I) identifying the research question; (II) identifying relevant studies; (III) selecting the studies; (IV) extracting and charting the data; and (V) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results.
Phase I: identifying the research question
A research question was identified in accordance with the PEOS (Population, Exposure, Outcomes, and Study type) methodology (Table 1). RMDs patients were selected due to the prevalence of the disease and its high rate of complications. The exposure chosen included telemedicine, telenursing, and telehealth intervention, due to their growing utilization in healthcare and their widespread availability to persons nowadays. Telemedicine was defined as the utilization of remote communication technology aimed at treating, advising, screening, or reminding patients about their monitoring and treatment (e.g., text messaging, telephone communication, videoconferencing, and the use of mobile applications). Indeed, TM, in the present scoping review, refers to the provision of healthcare in situations where the health professional and the patient are not in the same physical location; then communication between the patients and the health professionals is activated, and data and information are moved.
The team hypothesized that employing telemedicine could enhance self-care among patients with RMDs and result in better economic, clinical, and humanistic outcomes (ECHO) [25].
Patients with RMDs were defined as adults (≥ 18 years old) affected by RMDs according to the American College of Rheumatology/European Alliance of Associations of Rheumatology (ACR/EULAR).
As for the outcome, disease activity and ECHO were included in the review. Disease activity likely refers to the level of severity or progression of the RMDs being studied. As for ECHO, it stands for economic, clinical, and humanistic outcomes, indicating a comprehensive approach to assessing the impact of the intervention. Economic outcomes were not searched within the field of the present scoping review, yet identified if present in the included papers, based on the definitions of direct and indirect cost, as measures of medical resource utilization such as hospitalization and medication costs, or evaluations of reduced productivity and lost working days. Clinical outcomes were defined as medical events that occurred because of healthcare services, including rate of readmission, emergency department visit, mortality, adverse drug events (including all-cause and serious adverse events), blood, and physiological parameters. Humanistic outcomes were defined as the consequences of disease or treatment on patient functional status or quality of life, including physical and social function, general health and well-being, and life satisfaction, including the relationship with the healthcare system (i.e., satisfaction with care, quality care).
Phase II: identifying relevant studies
In order to answer our research question and to identify the existing literature, the electronic databases MEDLINE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), EMBASE (Excerpta Medica Database), APA (American Psychological Association), PsycINFO, and SCOPUS were investigated, using the following keywords to develop the search strategy for this scoping review: “rheumatic diseases,” “telemedicine,” “telenursing,” “telehealth,” and “patient reported outcome.” The search strategy process was supervised and guided by the biomedical librarian.
After reading several documents, a search strategy combining Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and free words was developed (Table 2). The different strings were divided into 3 dimensions: that relating to rheumatic diseases, that relating to telemedicine, and that relating to various patient outcomes. Each of these dimensions is joined by the Boolean operator “AND.” Keywords were chosen either as the terms of the Thesaurus (MeSH for MEDLINE, Headings for CINAHL, and EMTree for EMBASE) or as common words combined through the Boolean operators “OR,” “AND,” and “NOT.” Published records between January 1, 1990, and December 6, 2022, were downloaded for the screening process.
Records published between January 1, 1990, and December 6, 2022, were included for screening, limited to English language articles due to resource constraints. Exclusions comprised letters, editorials, news articles, reviews, theses, and other non-original qualitative or quantitative research papers. Additionally, studies lacking information about patients with RMDs or where telemedicine intervention was not explicitly detailed were excluded. Studies involving physicians, advanced practice nurses, physician associates, registered nurses, or pharmacists as presenters were included in the search.
Phase III: selecting the studies
The team that conducted the scoping review consisted of three nurses (KEA, MT, MRM) and a supervisor for the screening part with the role of resolving disagreements between the three reviewers (SB). The team members discussed and agreed on the relevance of the research question, examined whether the study design was appropriate, elaborated, and agreed on the research strategy. Retrieved literature was managed using EndNote™ (software version X9.3.3), which allowed the identification of duplicates to delete, according to literature title. After, titles and abstracts were screened independently by two reviewers (KEA and MRM, with the support of MT) according to the eligibility criteria. Then, retrieval of the full text was independently assessed in accordance with the inclusion/exclusion criteria. In case of disagreement, another reviewer (SB) was consulted. The study selection process is reported in the PRISMA flowchart.
Phase IV: extracting and charting the data
Data from each eligible article were extracted and compiled using a standardized excel sheet that was designed to guide the extraction of information from the records in accordance with the aim of the study, consisting of the following: authors, year and country of publication, study aim, study design, population and setting, intervention, results, outcomes measured, and tools used to measure them (Tables 3 and 4). Moreover, outcomes present in the included studies were divided following the ECHO model for the clinical, economic, and humanistic outcomes [25, 26].
Phase V: collating, summarizing, and reporting the results
Findings concerning telemedicine interventions for patients with rheumatic diseases were then summarized and structured to offer a comprehensive overview of the existing evidence in this domain. Additionally, an appraisal of the quality of the evidence for the included studies was conducted by applying the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tools for both quantitative and qualitative studies [27]. The total number of “yes” responses determined the quality of the studies, based on the established weight of the items. A CASP score > 7 indicates a study of good quality; a CASP score < 3 indicates a study of low quality. Each reviewer conducted an independent quality assessment. The CASP classifies the quality of evidence as three levels: high, moderate, and low. As stated for the screening process, disagreement on the assessment was solved by a third reviewer (SB). As for the mixed method study design, the mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) scale was used for quality assessment, as the CASP for mixed method studies is not available [28]. We do not present an overall score for mixed method studies, as the authors of the MMAT scale discourage to do so, instead, they advise to provide a more detailed presentation of the ratings of each criterion to better inform the quality of the included studies.
Results
Using our search strategy, a total of 1507 records were identified, and then using Endnote software, 1078 were identified as duplicates and removed (Fig. 1). Of these, 1000 were excluded based on title or abstract. For the 78 studies remaining, 16 were excluded following a full-text review for failing to meet other inclusion criteria. Thus, a total of 62 studies were ultimately included in this scoping review: 54 quantitative study designs, 4 qualitative study designs, and 4 mixed method study design. Tables 3 and 4 summarize the data extracted from the 62 included studies.
Prevalence of RMDs in the selected studies
In the selected studies, the most represented RMDs are RA (29.0–18/62) and OA (27.4%–17/62); then, we have fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) (16.1–10/62). As for other RMDs, four studies (6.5%) included patients with connective tissue diseases (CTDs) (two systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and two systemic sclerosis (SSc)), three studies included patients with gout (4.8%), three studies included patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) (4.8%), two studies included patients with inflammatory arthritis other than RA (3.2%), and 1 study included patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathy (1.6%). The remaining four studies (6.5%) did not specify the rheumatic diagnosis of RMDs patients included.
Country of the selected studies
As for the country of publication of the included studies, 50% (31/62) was conducted in Europe; 14.5% (9/62) in United States of America and the same percentage in Asia; 12.9% (8/62) was conducted in New Zealand and Australia, while the remaining studies were conducted in South America or Saudi Arabia (Fig. 2).
e-Health tools used in the selected studies
Multiple e-health tools were used in the studies included in the present review, namely 33.9% (21/62) used websites and online platforms, 29.0% (18/62) used mobile applications, 25.8% (16/62) used telephone contacts, 8.1% (5/62) used video-consultations, and only one study (1.6%) used wearable devices. The remaining one study included telemedicine in general, without specifying the tools or devices. In Fig. 3, devices used in the studies are represented following the study design, either qualitative or quantitative.
Clinical outcomes reported in the selected studies
Pain, as a clinical outcome (i.e., general pain, joint pain, or knee pain), has been assessed in most of the studies, meaning that all the telemedicine tools except for those using video-consultations. Also, one study on mobile applications included pain assessment in the qualitative study design. Disease activity, as a clinical outcome (i.e., disease activity measured by the clinicians including erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and/or C-reactive protein (CPR) values, and disease flare and disease severity) was assessed with all kinds of telemedicine tools. Other clinical outcomes assessed were serum uric acid (SUA) levels and body mass index (BMI), measured with telephone contact and mobile applications, respectively (Table 5 and Fig. 4).
Humanistic outcomes reported in the selected studies
As for the humanistic outcomes according to the ECHO framework, the authors agreed on including a comprehensive categorization of the outcomes classifying them as regarding the mental and physical function or the health management and health perception (Table 5 and Fig. 4).
Mental function included outcome measures as depression and anxiety, mental disability and psychological distress, catastrophizing, illness intrusiveness, fear of movement, and resilience. Physical function included outcome measures as the level of physical activity and mobility (i.e., general, hand, or upper limb function), health status and physical function, disease impact (i.e., RA and FMS), disability or physical distress, functional impact of the diseases (i.e., FMS), physical activity, and other outcomes such as fatigue, sleep quality, and stiffness. Health management included outcome measures such as disease knowledge (i.e., RA or FMS), treatment adherence, patient empowerment, activation and engagement, self-efficacy, self-care, self-management, coping strategies, health literacy, and patient education. One study included self-assessment and monitoring of Digital Ulcers (Dus) in SSc.
Health perception included outcome measures such as quality of life, illness perception, patient’s satisfaction, beliefs about medical treatment, appropriateness of care received, and trust in the rheumatologist. Lastly, other outcome measures related to the experience of the patients with the e-health tool used are included in some studies: In particular, they assessed usefulness, suitability, user satisfaction, patients’ and HCPs’ experience, quality of the app, and user acceptance.
Quality assessment of the studies
We conducted the quality assessment of the included studies, as specified in the method section (Tables S6 to S12, Supplementary information). The three qualitative studies assessed were all of good quality. As for the quantitative studies, we assessed 15 observational/cohort studies with 5 good quality studies, 6 medium quality studies, and 4 low quality studies and 39 experimental/clinical trial with 14 good quality studies, 22 medium quality studies, and 3 low quality studies.
Discussion
The present scoping review aimed at identifying the state of the art regarding the application of digital technology, in terms of devices used and in terms of PROs assessed in the rheumatology field. The outcomes of this scoping review helped us to address our original query and comprehend the current state of the art when it comes to using all telemedicine tools in the context of rheumatology, and particularly those that are linked to specific outcomes. To date, it is commonly recognized that information technology is important and should be integrated to traditional care and assistance models.
Regarding the studies included in this scoping review, the methodological variety of study designs is undoubtedly something worth reflecting on. The presence of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed method studies highlights the heterogeneity of the aspects that can be investigated in the field of telemedicine in rheumatology.
Moreover, most of the studies included in this scoping review were conducted in European countries, USA, and also Australia make our results generalizable to RMDs populations, clearly after tailoring them to the clinical context.
As for the disease prevalence, OA and RA are the most studied diseases among RMDs, followed by CTDs and FMS. Indeed, several studies addressed telemedicine for patients with RA and OA suggesting that healthcare facilities are more likely to invest in telemedicine for these conditions due to their high prevalence.
Regarding the outcomes assessed for RA, quality of life and disease activity are present in the majority of the studies [29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36]. In line with the literature, these are important outcomes to assess when dealing with arthritis as the disease affects the quality of life of RA patients by 93% and the ability to perform even the simplest daily gestures, such as opening a bottle, performing activities of daily life, climbing stairs, dressing, or washing by 85% [37].
In addition, disease activity is a pivotal parameter to include and monitor over time for all arthritis patients; in fact, specific questionnaires, that integrate inflammatory indices such as CRP or ESR in addition to patient-reported issues and health status, are widely used among the scientific and clinical community [38].
As for OA, most studies included further outcomes such as treatment adherence, in particular physical exercise and self-management, as these represent the core strategies when dealing with these patients [29, 39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48].
In the present review, the heterogeneity emerged from the included studies in terms of disease diagnoses, outcomes evaluated, and digital technologies used. Indeed, multiple tools of telemedicine, namely more than 1/3 of them used websites and online platforms, almost 1/3 used mobile applications, and the last 1/3 used telephone contacts. Video-consultations and wearable devices are less likely to be used when assessing or treating patients with RMDs.
Furthermore, most studies that compare e-health interventions with standard of care, or standard visits and assistance, found that the use of telemedicine produces either positive or non-inferior outcomes [42, 46, 47, 49,50,51]. These studies highlight the significance of both the patient’s adherence to the treatment plan and the monitoring provided by HCPs, regardless of the digital tool utilized, which represent fundamental outcomes for chronic inflammatory RMDs. Moreover, these factors are crucial for nursing practice, indeed, according to Gordon’s functional health patterns of health perception/management and activity/exercise, nurses, and HCPs in general, can plan interventions to promote treatment adherence while maintaining an appropriate quantity of physical activity [52].
When it comes to chronicity, self-management, and patient’s autonomy in managing their illness are generally encouraged by specific mobile applications, and nearly all findings indicate that the use of these e-tools has a positive effect on PROMs. Indeed, also other studies are addressing the need to define the role of digital tools regarding self-management in RMDs patients [53].
Essentially, these tools allow the patients to self-manage and monitor their condition, with direct access to relevant information and data about their disease, while encouraging patient’s autonomy.
When telephone contacts are used, findings from the review showed that patient outcomes are favorable specifically regarding disease activity and disease management. Indeed, compared to websites and smartphone apps, telephone contact is more likely to offer inclusivity for patients with lower digital health literacy. This aspect and related factors have not received enough research attention, yet technology resources are today widely available for patients, thus evaluating that the patients’ digital health literacy level is mandatory and determine its casual factors [54].
To summarize, the comprehensive disease monitoring, consistent with the person-centered approach, is in accordance with the results of the review, especially when we look at the humanistic outcomes. In fact, dealing with mental and physical function, health management, and perceptions allow us to assure a comprehensive assessment required for RMDs.
In addition, it is critical to recognize and detect timely significant symptoms or flare-ups to refer patients to face-to-face consultations and prevent further complications.
Indeed, before implementing digital health interventions, a thorough evaluation of the patient in terms of clinical condition, health literacy level, and social context of life is required to provide international working groups’ protocols, recommendations, and guidelines.
Strengths and limitations
This review has some strengths. First, diverse study designs provide a holistic understanding of telemedicine interventions. Second, valuable insights into improved disease management and patient-reported outcomes are highlighted. However, the clinical heterogeneity of tele-healthcare interventions and methodological bias can also constrain the evidence for effectiveness, but they support the personalization of clinical care paths.
Implications for clinical practice and research
The review underscores the need to critically evaluate research quality and tailor care pathways in telemedicine for rheumatological conditions. While digital tools hold promise, challenges such as technological diversity and patient health literacy require attention.
Future studies should focus on integrating patient perspectives for effective implementation and person-centered care.
In conclusion, the present scoping review showed the heterogeneity of digital tools in the field of rheumatology, which underlines the difficulty in transferring to clinical practice the results of valid studies. Clearly, OA and RA are the most studied diseases among RMDs, and effective tele-rehabilitation models have been presented, along with the application of the tight control strategy that recently emerged to be necessary in disease monitoring to achieve disease remission. Future studies should focus on summarizing and producing clinical recommendations for RMDs and developing studies on other RMDs, such as CTDs or FMS.
Data availability
The datasets for this study can be requested to the corresponding author.
References
World Health Organization-WHO (2022) Musculoskeletal health. Available from: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/musculoskeletal-conditions
Koo M, Lu MC (2023) Rheumatic diseases: new progress in clinical research and pathogenesis. Medicina (Kaunas) 59(9):1581
Salaffi F, Di Carlo M, Carotti M, Farah S, Ciapetti A, Gutierrez M (2019) The impact of different rheumatic diseases on health-related quality of life: a comparison with a selected sample of healthy individuals using SF-36 questionnaire, EQ-5D and SF-6D utility values. Acta Biomed 89(4):541–557
World Health Organization-WHO. Chronic rheumatic conditions. Available from: http://www.who.int/chp/topics/rheumatic/en/
Società Italiana di Reumatologia -SIR (2018) Un italiano su due non conosce la prevenzione delle malattie reumatiche. Available from: https://www.reumatologia.it/cmsx.asp?IDPg=599
Briggs AM, Cross MJ, Hoy DG, Sànchez-Riera L, Blyth FM, Woolf AD et al (2016) Musculoskeletal health conditions represent a global threat to healthy aging: a report for the 2015 World Health Organization World Report on Ageing and Health. Gerontologist 56(Suppl 2):S243–S255
Safiri S, Kolahi AA, Smith E, Hill C, Bettampadi D, Mansournia MA et al (2020) Global, regional and national burden of osteoarthritis 1990–2017: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Ann Rheum Dis 79(6):819–828
El Aoufy K, Melis MR, Bellando Randone S, Blagojevic J, Bartoli F, Fiori G et al (2022) The positive side of the coin: Sars-Cov-2 pandemic has taught us how much Telemedicine is useful as standard of care procedure in real life. Clin Rheumatol 41(2):573–579
McDougall JA, Ferucci ED, Glover J, Fraenkel L (2017) Telerheumatology: a systematic review. Arthritis Care Res 69(10):1546–1557
National Guideline Center (UK) (2018) NICE evidence reviews collection. Treat-to-target: rheumatoid arthritis in adults: diagnosis and management: Evidence review C. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), London
de Annette T, Philipp B, Andrea M, Yvette M, Chetan BM, Johannes K et al (2022) 2022 EULAR points to consider for remote care in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. Ann Rheum Dis 81(8):1065
Bessette L, Haraoui B, Rampakakis E, Dembowy J, Trépanier M-O, Pope J (2023) Effectiveness of a treat-to-target strategy in patients with moderate to severely active rheumatoid arthritis treated with abatacept. Arthritis Res Ther 25(1):183
Weinstein RS, Lopez AM, Joseph BA, Erps KA, Holcomb M, Barker GP et al (2014) Telemedicine, telehealth, and mobile health applications that work: opportunities and barriers. Am J Med 127(3):183–187
World Health Organization -WHO. Recommendations on digital interventions for health system strengthening – Evidence and recommendations. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-RHR-19.102019
Schlegel M, Bachmann S (2024) Influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical management and on healthcare delivery of immune-mediated rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases during the first pandemic period February to July 2020: a systematic review. Medicina (Kaunas) 60(4):596
Piga M, Cangemi I, Mathieu A, Cauli A (2017) Telemedicine for patients with rheumatic diseases: systematic review and proposal for research agenda. Sem Arthritis Rheum 47(1):121–128
Koonin LM, Hoots B, Tsang CA, Leroy Z, Farris K, Jolly B et al (2020) Trends in the use of telehealth during the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic—United States, January–March 2020. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 69(43):1595
Mehrotra A, Ray K, Brockmeyer DM, Barnett ML, Bender JA (2020) Rapidly converting to “virtual practices”: outpatient care in the era of Covid-19. NEJM Catal Innov Care Deliv 1(2)
Reeves JJ, Hollandsworth HM, Torriani FJ, Taplitz R, Abeles S, Tai-Seale M et al (2020) Rapid response to COVID-19: health informatics support for outbreak management in an academic health system. J Am Med Inform Assoc 27(6):853–859
Tang W, Khalili L, Askanase A (2021) Telerheumatology: a narrative review. Rheumatol Immunol Res 2(3):139–145
Mehta B, Jannat-Khah D, Fontana MA, Moezinia CJ, Mancuso CA, Bass AR et al (2020) Impact of COVID-19 on vulnerable patients with rheumatic disease: results of a worldwide survey. RMD Open 6(3):e001378
Arksey H, O’Malley L (2005) Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol 8(1):19–32
Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK (2010) Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci 5:69
Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D et al (2018) PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med 169(7):467–473
Gunter MJ (1999) The role of the ECHO model in outcomes research and clinical practice improvement. Am J Manag Care 5(4 Suppl):S217–S224
Deng ZJ, Gui L, Chen J, Peng SS, Ding YF, Wei AH (2023) Clinical, economic and humanistic outcomes of medication therapy management services: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Pharmacol 14:1143444
Critical Appraisal Skills Programme -CASP (2020) checklists. Available from: https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/
Hong QNPP, Fàbregues S, Bartlett G, Boardman F, Cargo M, Dagenais P, Gagnon M-P, Griffiths F, Nicolau B, O’Cathain A et al (2018) Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT), version 2018. Registration of Copyright (#1148552), Canadian Intellectual Property Office, Industry Canada
De Thurah A, Stengaard-Pedersen K, Axelsen M, Fredberg U, Schougaard LMV, Hjollund NHI et al (2018) Tele-health followup strategy for tight control of disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis: results of a randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Care Res 70(3):353–360
Fedkov D, Berghofen A, Weiss C, Peine C, Lang F, Knitza J et al (2022) Efficacy and safety of a mobile app intervention in patients with inflammatory arthritis: a prospective pilot study. Rheumatol Int 42(12):2177–2190
Guaracha-Basáñez GA, Contreras-Yáñez I, Estrada González VA, Pacheco-Santiago LD, Valverde-Hernández SS, Pascual-Ramos V (2022) Impact of a hybrid medical care model in the rheumatoid arthritis patient-reported outcomes: a non-inferiority crossover randomized study. J Telemed Telecare 31:1357633X221122098
Hernández-Zambrano SM, Castiblanco-Montañez R-A, Valencia Serna AM, Nonzoque Toro V, Sánchez Camargo MP, Restrepo Rodríguez LN et al (2022) Modifications in self-care, quality of life and therapeutic adherence in patients with rheumatoid arthritis during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic treated by telehealth. Rev Colomb Reumatol 29(4):293–302
Müskens WD, Rongen-van Dartel SAA, Vogel C, Huis A, Adang EMM, van Riel PLCM (2021) Telemedicine in the management of rheumatoid arthritis: maintaining disease control with less health-care utilization. Rheumatol Adv Pract 5(1):rkaa079
Seppen B, Wiegel J, Ter Wee MM, van Schaardenburg D, Roorda LD, Nurmohamed MT et al (2022) Smartphone-assisted patient-initiated care versus usual care in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and low disease activity: a randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Rheumatol 74(11):1737–1745
Skougaard M, Bliddal H, Christensen R, Ellegaard K, Nielsen SM, Zavada J et al (2020) Patients with rheumatoid arthritis acquire sustainable skills for home monitoring: a prospective dual-country cohort study (ELECTOR clinical trial I). J Rheumatol 47(5):658–667
Song Y, Reifsnider E, Chen Y, Wang Y, Chen H (2022) The Impact of a Theory-Based mHealth Intervention on Disease Knowledge, Self-efficacy, and Exercise Adherence Among Ankylosing Spondylitis Patients: Randomized Controlled Trial. J Med Internet Res 24(10):e38501
Malm K, Bergman S, Andersson MLE, Bremander A, Larsson I (2017) Quality of life in patients with established rheumatoid arthritis: a phenomenographic study. SAGE Open Med 5:2050312117713647
Aletaha D, Smolen JS (2007) The simplified disease activity index (SDAI) and clinical disease activity index (CDAI) to monitor patients in standard clinical care. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 21(4):663–675
Allam A, Kostova Z, Nakamoto K, Schulz PJ (2015) The effect of social support features and gamification on a Web-based intervention for rheumatoid arthritis patients: randomized controlled trial. J Med Internet Res 17(1):e3510
Baker K, LaValley MP, Brown C, Felson DT, Ledingham A, Keysor JJ (2020) Efficacy of computer-based telephone counseling on long-term adherence to strength training in elderly patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized trial. Arthritis Care Res 72(7):982–990
Bennell KL, Campbell PK, Egerton T, Metcalf B, Kasza J, Forbes A et al (2017) Telephone coaching to enhance a home-based physical activity program for knee osteoarthritis: a randomized clinical trial. Arthritis Care Res 69(1):84–94
Blixen CE, Bramstedt KA, Hammel JP, Tilley BC (2004) A pilot study of health education via a nurse-run telephone self-management programme for elderly people with osteoarthritis. J Telemed Telecare 10(1):44–49
Cuperus N, Hoogeboom TJ, Kersten CC, den Broeder AA, Vlieland TPMV, van den Ende CHM (2015) Randomized trial of the effectiveness of a non-pharmacological multidisciplinary face-to-face treatment program on daily function compared to a telephone-based treatment program in patients with generalized osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 23(8):1267–1275
Dahlberg LE, Dell’Isola A, Lohmander LS, Nero H (2020) Improving osteoarthritis care by digital means-Effects of a digital self-management program after 24-or 48-weeks of treatment. PLoS One 15(3):e0229783
Pelle T, van der Palen J, de Graaf F, van den Hoogen F, Bevers K, van den Ende E (2021) Use and usability of the Dr. Bart app and its relation with health care utilization and clinical outcomes in people with knee and/or hip osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 29:S422
Rini C, Porter LS, Somers TJ, McKee DC, DeVellis RF, Smith M et al (2015) Automated, internet-based pain coping skills training to manage osteoarthritis pain: a randomized controlled trial. Pain 156(5):837
Tore NG, Oskay D, Haznedaroglu S (2023) The quality of physiotherapy and rehabilitation program and the effect of telerehabilitation on patients with knee osteoarthritis. Clin Rheumatol 42(3):903–915
Hinman RS, Nelligan RK, Bennell KL, Delany C (2017) “Sounds a bit crazy, but it was almost more personal:” a qualitative study of patient and clinician experiences of physical therapist–prescribed exercise for knee osteoarthritis via skype. Arthritis Care Res 69(12):1834–1844
Alasfour M, Almarwani M (2022) The effect of innovative smartphone application on adherence to a home-based exercise programs for female older adults with knee osteoarthritis in Saudi Arabia: a randomized controlled trial. Disabil Rehabil 44(11):2420–2427
Huang Z, Zhong X, Xie Z, Tianwang LI (2019) OP0156 HPR. The feasibility and effectiveness of telemedicine for knee osteoarthritis in disease management: a randomised control trial. Ann of Rheum Dis 153-153
Rafiq MT, Hamid MSA, Hafiz E (2021) The effect of rehabilitation protocol using mobile health in overweight and obese patients with knee osteoarthritis: a clinical trial. Advances in Rheumatology 61:63
Gordon M (1994). In: Mosby (ed) Nursing Diagnosis: Process and Application, 3rd edn. p 421
Barnett R, Shakaib N, Ingram TA, Jones S, Sengupta R, Rouse PC (2024) Rehabilitation interventions delivered via telehealth to support self-management of rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases: a scoping review protocol. PLoS One 19(4):e0301668
Arcury TA, Sandberg JC, Melius KP, Quandt SA, Leng X, Latulipe C et al (2020) Older adult internet use and eHealth literacy. J Appl Gerontol 39(2):141–150
Al Harash A, Laginya G, Ayoub WT (2021) Efficacy and outcomes of a novel telephone-based gout disease management program. Open Rheumatol J 15(1):51–56
Ammerlaan J, van Os-Medendorp H, Scholtus L, de Vos A, Zwier M, Bijlsma H et al (2014) Feasibility of an online and a face-to-face version of a self-management program for young adults with a rheumatic disease: experiences of young adults and peer leaders. Pediatr Rheumatol 12(1):1–8
Berdal G, Bø I, Dager TN, Dingsør A, Eppeland SG, Hagfors J et al (2018) Structured goal planning and supportive telephone follow-up in rheumatology care: results From a pragmatic, stepped-wedge, cluster-randomized trial. Arthritis Care Res 70(11):1576–1586
Camerini L, Camerini A-L, Schulz PJ (2013) Do participation and personalization matter? A model-driven evaluation of an Internet-based patient education intervention for fibromyalgia patients. Patient Educ Couns 92(2):229–234
Collinge W, Soltysik R, Yarnold P (2020) Fibromyalgia impact reduction using online personal health informatics: longitudinal observational study. J Med Internet Res 22(4):e15819
Durst J, Roesel I, Sudeck G, Sassenberg K, Krauss I (2020) Effectiveness of human versus computer-based instructions for exercise on physical activity–related health competence in patients with hip osteoarthritis: randomized noninferiority crossover trial. J Med Internet Res 22(9):e18233
Gossec L, Cantagrel A, Soubrier M, Berthelot J-M, Joubert J-M, Combe B et al (2018) An e-health interactive self-assessment website (Sanoia®) in rheumatoid arthritis. A 12-month randomized controlled trial in 320 patients. Joint Bone Spine 85(6):709–14
Hoving JL, Zoer I, van der Meer M, van der Straaten Y, Logtenberg-Rutten C, Kraak-Put S et al (2014) E-health to improve work functioning in employees with rheumatoid arthritis in rheumatology practice: a feasibility study. Scand J Rheumatol 43(6):481–7
Kennedy CA, Warmington K, Flewelling C, Shupak R, Papachristos A, Jones C et al (2017) A prospective comparison of telemedicine versus in-person delivery of an interprofessional education program for adults with inflammatory arthritis. J Telemed Telecare 23(2):197–206
Khan F, Granville N, Malkani R, Chathampally Y (2020) Health-related quality of life improvements in systemic lupus erythematosus derived from a digital therapeutic plus tele-health coaching intervention: randomized controlled pilot trial. J Med Internet Res 22(10):e23868
Lambrecht A, Vuillerme N, Raab C, Simon D, Messner E-M, Hagen M et al (2021) Quality of a supporting mobile app for rheumatic patients: patient-based assessment using the user version of the Mobile Application Scale (uMARS). Front Med 8:715345
Lawford BJ, Bennell KL, Campbell PK, Kasza J, Hinman RS (2020) Therapeutic alliance between physical therapists and patients with knee osteoarthritis consulting via telephone: a longitudinal study. Arthritis Care Res 72(5):652–660
Lee J, Park SH, Ju JH, Cho JH (2019) Application of a real-time pain monitoring system in Korean fibromyalgia patients: a pilot study. Int J Rheum Dis 22(5):934–939
Lu MC, Guo HR, Livneh H, Lin MC, Lai NS, Tsai TY (2020) The effectiveness of nurse-led case management for patients with rheumatoid arthritis in Taiwan. Int J Clin Pract 74(2):e13443
Magnol M, Eleonore B, Claire R, Castagne B, Pugibet M, Lukas C et al (2021) Use of eHealth by patients with rheumatoid arthritis: observational, cross-sectional, multicenter study. J Med Internet Res 23(1):e19998
Miró J, Lleixà-Daga M, de la Vega R, Llorens-Vernet P, Jensen MP (2022) A mobile application to help self-manage pain severity, anxiety, and depressive symptoms in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome: a pilot study. Int J Environ Res Public Health 19(19):12026
Murphy SL, Barber M, Huang S, Sabbagh M, Cutter G, Khanna D (2021) Intensive and app-delivered occupational therapy to improve upper extremity function in early diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis: a pilot two-arm trial. Rheumatology 60(11):5002–5011
Oldroyd AGS, Krogh NS, Dixon WG, Chinoy H (2022) Investigating characteristics of idiopathic inflammatory myopathy flares using daily symptom data collected via a smartphone app. Rheumatology 61(12):4845–4854
Östlind E, Sant’Anna A, Eek F, Stigmar K, Ekvall Hansson E (2021) Physical activity patterns, adherence to using a wearable activity tracker during a 12-week period and correlation between self-reported function and physical activity in working age individuals with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 22(1):1–12
Paolucci T, de Sire A, Ferrillo M, di Fabio D, Molluso A, Patruno A et al (2022) Telerehabilitation proposal of mind-body technique for physical and psychological outcomes in patients with fibromyalgia. Front Physiol 13:917956
Pouls BPH, Bekker CL, Gundogan F, Hebing RCF, van Onzenoort HAW, van de Ven LI et al (2022) Gaming for adherence to medication using Ehealth in rheumatoid arthritis (GAMER) study: a randomised controlled trial. RMD Open 8(2):e002616
Rodríguez Sánchez-Laulhé P, Luque-Romero LG, Barrero-García FJ, Biscarri-Carbonero Á, Blanquero J, Suero-Pineda A et al (2022) An exercise and educational and self-management program delivered with a smartphone APP (CareHand) in adults with rheumatoid arthritis of the hands: randomized controlled trial. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 10(4):e35462
Rudin V, Lubow E, Bundy N, Lytle M, Culjat M, Dyhrberg M (2020) Digital therapeutic platform for management of systemic lupus erythematosus. 42nd Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc (EMBC). pp 5402–5405
Salaffi F, Ciapetti A, Gasparini S, Atzeni F, Sarzi-Puttini P, Baroni M (2015) Web/Internet-based telemonitoring of a randomized controlled trial evaluating the time-integrated effects of a 24-week multicomponent intervention on key health outcomes in patients with fibromyalgia. Clin Exp Rheumatol 33(1 Suppl 88):S93-101
Serlachius A, Schache K, Kieser A, Arroll B, Petrie K, Dalbeth N (2019) Association between user engagement of a mobile health app for gout and improvements in self-care behaviors: randomized controlled trial. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 7(8):e15021
Song Y, Reifsnider E, Zhao S, Xie X, Chen H (2020) A randomized controlled trial of the Effects of a telehealth educational intervention on medication adherence and disease activity in rheumatoid arthritis patients. J Adv Nurs 76(5):1172–1181
Song Y, Xie X, Chen Y, Wang Y, Yang H, Nie A et al (2021) The effects of WeChat-based educational intervention in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: a randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Res Ther 23(1):1–9
Tyrrell J, Schmidt W, Williams DH, Redshaw CH (2016) Physical activity in ankylosing spondylitis: evaluation and analysis of an eHealth tool. BMJ Health & Care Inform 23:23
Umapathy H, Bennell K, Dickson C, Dobson F, Fransen M, Jones G et al (2015) The web-based osteoarthritis management resource my joint pain improves quality of care: a quasi-experimental study. J Med Internet Res 17(7):e167
Vallejo MA, Ortega J, Rivera J, Comeche MI, Vallejo-Slocker L (2015) Internet versus face-to-face group cognitive-behavioral therapy for fibromyalgia: a randomized control trial. J Psychiatr Res 68:106–113
van Der Vaart R, Drossaert CHC, Taal E, Drossaers-Bakker KW, Vonkeman HE, van de Laar MAFJ (2014) Impact of patient-accessible electronic medical records in rheumatology: use, satisfaction and effects on empowerment among patients. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 15(1):1–9
Wang X, Urban H, Bennell KL, Dickson C, Dobson F, Fransen M et al (2020) My joint pain, a web-based resource, effects on education and quality of care at 24 months. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 21:1–11
Williams DA, Kuper D, Segar M, Mohan N, Sheth M, Clauw DJ (2010) Internet-enhanced management of fibromyalgia: a randomized controlled trial. PAIN® 151(3):694–702
Yuan SLK, Couto LA, Marques AP (2021) Effects of a six-week mobile app versus paper book intervention on quality of life, symptoms, and self-care in patients with fibromyalgia: a randomized parallel trial. Braz J Phys Ther 25(4):428–436
Zhang J, Mihai C, Tüshaus L, Scebba G, Distler O, Karlen W (2021) Wound image quality from a mobile health tool for home-based chronic wound management with real-time quality feedback: randomized feasibility study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 9(7):e26149
Zhao S, Chen H (2019) Effectiveness of health education by telephone follow-up on self-efficacy among discharged patients with rheumatoid arthritis: a randomised control trial. J Clin Nurs 28(21–22):3840–3847
De Vries HJ, Kloek CJJ, De Bakker DH, Dekker J, Bossen D, Veenhof C (2017) Determinants of adherence to the online component of a blended intervention for patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis: a mixed methods study embedded in the e-exercise trial. Telemed e-Health 23(12):1002–1010
Fernon A, Nguyen AD, Baysari MT, Day RO (2016) A user-centred approach to designing an eTool for gout management. Stud Health Technol Inform 227:28–33
Muehlensiepen F, May S, Hadaschik K, Vuillerme N, Heinze M, Grahammer M et al (2023) Digitally supported shared decision-making and treat-to-target in rheumatology: a qualitative study embedded in a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Rheumatol Int 43(4):695–703
Najm A, Lempp H, Gossec L, Berenbaum F, Nikiphorou E (2020) Needs, experiences, and views of people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases on self-management mobile health apps: mixed methods study. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth 8(4):e14351
Pani D, Piga M, Barabino G, Crabolu M, Uras S, Mathieu A et al (2017) Home tele-rehabilitation for rheumatic patients: impact and satisfaction of care analysis. J Telemed Telecare 23(2):292–300
Shewchuk B, Green LA, Barber T, Miller J, Teare S, Campbell-Scherer D et al (2021) Patients’ use of mobile health for self-management of knee osteoarthritis: results of a 6-week pilot study. JMIR Formative Res 5(11):e30495
Vanderboom CE, Vincent A, Luedtke CA, Rhudy LM, Bowles KH (2014) Feasibility of interactive technology for symptom monitoring in patients with fibromyalgia. Pain Manag Nurs 15(3):557–564
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the librarian Tessa Piazzini for her support in constructing the search strategy.
Funding
Open access funding provided by Università degli Studi di Firenze within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work: KEA, MRM, MT, CEM, SBR, GB, AMP, MMC, SB, LR.
Drafted the work or revised it critically for important intellectual content: KEA, MMC, SB.
Provided approval for publication of the content: KEA, MRM, MT, CEM, SBR, GB, AMP, MMC, SB, LR.
Agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved: KEA, MRM, MT, CEM, SBR, GB, AMP, MMC, SB, LR.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
El Aoufy, K., Melis, M.R., Magi, C.E. et al. Evidence for telemedicine heterogeneity in rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases care: a scoping review. Clin Rheumatol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-024-07052-w
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-024-07052-w