Disability and rehabilitation. Assistive technology · 2026
Appropriate use recommendations for digital technology in cognitive telerehabilitation for people living with Parkinson's disease.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Moon Sanghee, Leroi Iracema, Kletzel Sandra, Foster Erin R, Gross Monika, Heyn Patricia, Hirsch Mark, Sivaramakrishnan Anjali, van Wegen Erwin E H, Devos Hannes
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Digital technology offers promising applications for cognitive telerehabilitation in Parkinson's disease (PD), but its optimal use requires structured guidelines. This project aimed to develop appropriate use recommendations (AURs) for digital technology in cognitive telerehabilitation for people living with PD.
METHODS: A multi-phase approach involving strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis and expert consensus was utilised.
RESULTS: The SWOT analysis, interactive workshops and survey outcomes informed the list of AURs for cognitive telerehabilitation. Consensus was reached on 16 AURs addressing usability, safety, efficacy and implementation. Strengths included enhanced engagement, flexibility and real-time feedback, with recommendations to tailor interventions to patient needs. Weaknesses centred on safety, technology adaptation and the need for tailored support. Opportunities included fostering social interactions, managing PD-related behavioural symptoms and leveraging advanced assessment methods. Threats included a lack of co-design with end-users and limited robust evidence of efficacy.
CONCLUSION: The finalised AURs provide structured guidance on optimising digital technology for cognitive telerehabilitation in PD, balancing clinical efficacy with implementation challenges. These recommendations will support clinicians and researchers in delivering safe, effective and patient-centred digital interventions.
METHODS: A multi-phase approach involving strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis and expert consensus was utilised.
RESULTS: The SWOT analysis, interactive workshops and survey outcomes informed the list of AURs for cognitive telerehabilitation. Consensus was reached on 16 AURs addressing usability, safety, efficacy and implementation. Strengths included enhanced engagement, flexibility and real-time feedback, with recommendations to tailor interventions to patient needs. Weaknesses centred on safety, technology adaptation and the need for tailored support. Opportunities included fostering social interactions, managing PD-related behavioural symptoms and leveraging advanced assessment methods. Threats included a lack of co-design with end-users and limited robust evidence of efficacy.
CONCLUSION: The finalised AURs provide structured guidance on optimising digital technology for cognitive telerehabilitation in PD, balancing clinical efficacy with implementation challenges. These recommendations will support clinicians and researchers in delivering safe, effective and patient-centred digital interventions.