Digitally Assisted Versus Conventional Home-Based Rehabilitation After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical impact of a 12-wk home-based digitally assisted rehabilitation program after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair against conventional home-based rehabilitation. DESIGN: The digital therapy group performed independent technology-assisted sessions complemented with 13 face-to-face sessions, and the conventional therapy group had conventional face-to-face physical therapy (30 sessions). Primary outcome was functional change between baseline and 12 wks, measured through the Constant-Murley score. Secondary outcomes were the change in the QuickDASH Scale and shoulder range of motion. RESULTS: Fifty participants enrolled; 41 completed the 12-wk program (23 digital therapy group vs. 18 conventional therapy group), and 32 (15 vs. 17) were available for the 12-mo follow-up assessment. No differences were found between groups regarding study endpoints at the end of the 12-wk program. However, follow-up results revealed the superiority of the digital therapy group for QuickDASH (P = 0.043), as well as an interaction between time and group in the Constant-Murley score (P = 0.047) in favor of the digital therapy group. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate that digital therapeutics can be used to achieve similar, if not superior, short- and long-term outcomes as conventional approaches after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, while being far less human resource intensive than conventional care.Level of evidence: II.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The authors have previously demonstrated the utility of a completely remote digital care program integrating exercise, education, and cognitive behavioral therapy in several MSK conditions, including for upper limb.
“Previously, we have demonstrated the utility of a completely remote digital care program (DCP) integrating exercise, education, and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in several MSK conditions [42,43,44,45], including for upper limb [46,47,48].”
From Digital Rehabilitation for Elbow Pain Musculoskeletal Conditions: A Prospective Longitudinal Cohort Study (2022) · cites this paper as [46]
The Conclusions report utility for digitally assisted shoulder rehabilitation, supporting the upper-limb portion of the claim. But the Methods (Intervention; page unavailable) describe exercise sessions supplemented by 13 face-to-face physical therapy sessions, not a completely remote program, and do not describe education or cognitive behavioral therapy. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThis DCP was previously validated for feasibility and effectiveness in post-surgery MSK rehabilitation.
“This DCP was previously validated (feasibility and effectiveness) in post-surgery MSK rehabilitation [38, 41, 45, 46].”
From Telerehabilitation of acute musculoskeletal multi-disorders: prospective, single-arm, interventional study (2022) · cites this paper as [45]
Telerehabilitation provides comparable results to outpatient physical therapy and face-to-face home rehabilitation, while reducing costs.
“Telerehabilitation has shown to provide comparable results to outpatient physical therapy [35–39] and to face-to-face home rehabilitation [40, 41], while reducing costs [42–44].”
From Telerehabilitation of acute musculoskeletal multi-disorders: prospective, single-arm, interventional study (2022) · cites this paper as [39]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 57 · Cited by 52
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [58]Desrosiers J Hébert R Bravo G,: Shoulder range of motion of healthy elderly people: a normative study. Phys Occup Ther Geriatr 1995; 13: 101– 14
- Authors
- Correia, F. D., Molinos, M., Luís, S., Carvalho, D., Carvalho, C., Costa, P., Seabra, R., Francisco, G., Bento, V., & Lains, J.
- Affiliations
- Memorial Hermann Institute for Rehabilitation and Research Foundation (US)
- Sword Health, SA (Portugal) (PT)
- Hospital da Prelada (PT)
- Corresponding author
- Correia, Fernando Dias
- ORCID
- Venue
- American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
- Published
- 2021-04-30
- Volume
- 101
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 237-249
- ISSN
- 0894-9115 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-7385
- PMC
- PMC8826616
- OpenAlex
- W3158074354
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 57
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 13
- FWCI
- 7.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Shoulder Injury and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Keywords
- arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, home-based rehabilitation, digital therapeutics, telemedicine, physiotherapy, shoulder function, Constant score, QuickDASH, shoulder range of motion, long-term outcomes
- MeSH terms
- Rotator Cuff Injuries, Aged, Arthroscopy, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Recovery of Function, Physical Therapy Modalities, Mobile Applications
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review