Cited by 23Telemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Enablers and barriers of people with chronic musculoskeletal pain for engaging in telehealth interventions: protocol for a qualitative systematic review and meta-synthesis

Open access
Fernandes, Lívia G., Devan, Hemakumar, Kamper, Steven J., Williams, Christopher M., Saragiotto, Bruno T.·2020·Systematic Reviews

Abstract

Background: Chronic musculoskeletal pain represents an enormous burden in society. Best-practice care for chronic musculoskeletal pain suggests adoption of self-management strategies. Telehealth interventions (e.g., videoconferencing) are a promising approach to promote self-management and have the potential to overcome geographical barriers between patient and care providers. Understanding patient perspectives will inform and identify practical challenges towards applying the self-management strategies delivered via telehealth to everyday lives. The aim of this study is to synthesize the perceptions of individuals with musculoskeletal pain with regards to enablers and barriers to engaging in telehealth interventions for chronic musculoskeletal pain self-management. Methods: A systematic review of qualitative studies will be performed based on searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, and PsycINFO databases. Screening of identified titles will be conducted by two independent investigators. Data extraction will retrieve detailed qualitative information from selected articles. The critical appraisal skills program (CASP) checklist will be used for critical appraisal of included studies, and the level of confidence in the findings will be assessed using the confidence in the evidence from reviews of qualitative research (GRADE-CERQual). A thematic synthesis approach will be used to derive analytical themes. Discussion: This review will systematically identify, synthesize, and present enablers and barriers reported by people with musculoskeletal pain to engage in telehealth interventions. The review will provide information required to support the design and improvement of telehealth services. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42019136148

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13643-020-01390-x

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fernandes, L. G., Devan, H., Kamper, S. J., Williams, C. M., & Saragiotto, B. T.
Affiliations
  • Universidade Cidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • University of Otago (NZ)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • Hunter Medical Research Institute (AU)
Corresponding author
Fernandes, Lívia G.
Venue
Systematic Reviews
Published
2020-05-31
Volume
9
Issue
1
Pages
122-122
ISSN
2046-4053 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3030037215
Cited by
23
References
36
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • University of Otago
  • Hunter New England Local Health District
  • Hunter Medical Research Institute
  • University of Sydney
  • Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (2019/, 16/24217-7, 2019/14032-8)
  • Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
chronic musculoskeletal pain, telemedicine, self-management, patient engagement, barriers and facilitators, patient perspectives, videoconferencing
MeSH terms
Self-Management, Systematic Reviews as Topic, Humans, Telemedicine, Qualitative Research, Chronic Pain, Musculoskeletal Pain

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