Show simple item record

FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWithers, H.G.en
dc.contributor.authorGlinsky, J.V.en
dc.contributor.authorChu, J.en
dc.contributor.authorJennings, M.D.en
dc.contributor.authorStarkey, I.en
dc.contributor.authorParmeter, R.en
dc.contributor.authorBoulos, M.en
dc.contributor.authorCruwys, J.J.en
dc.contributor.authorDuong, K.en
dc.contributor.authorJordan, I.en
dc.contributor.authorWong, D.en
dc.contributor.authorTrang, S.en
dc.contributor.authorDuong, M.en
dc.contributor.authorLiu, H.en
dc.contributor.authorHayes, A.J.en
dc.contributor.authorLambert, T.E.en
dc.contributor.authorZadro, J.R.en
dc.contributor.authorSherrington, C.en
dc.contributor.authorMaher, C.en
dc.contributor.authorLucas, B.R.en
dc.contributor.authorTaylor, D.en
dc.contributor.authorFerreira, M.L.en
dc.contributor.authorHarvey, L.A.en
dc.date.accessioned2026-05-03T23:48:00Z
dc.date.available2026-05-03T23:48:00Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2123/35219
dc.description.abstractQUESTION: Is remotely delivered physiotherapy as good or better than face-to-face physiotherapy for the management of musculoskeletal conditions? DESIGN: Randomised controlled, non-inferiority trial with concealed allocation, blinded assessors and intention-to-treat analysis. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 210 adult participants with a musculoskeletal condition who presented for outpatient physiotherapy at five public hospitals in Sydney. INTERVENTION: One group received a remotely delivered physiotherapy program for 6 weeks that consisted of one face-to-face physiotherapy session in conjunction with weekly text messages, phone calls at 2 and 4 weeks, and an individualised home exercise program delivered through an app. The other group received usual face-to-face physiotherapy care in an outpatient setting. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the Patient Specific Functional Scale at 6 weeks with a pre-specified non-inferiority margin of -15 out of 100 points. Secondary outcomes included: the Patient Specific Functional Scale at 26 weeks; kinesiophobia, pain, function/disability, global impression of change and quality of life at 6 and 26 weeks; and satisfaction with service delivery at 6 weeks. RESULTS: The mean between-group difference (95% CI) for the Patient Specific Functional Scale at 6 weeks was 2.7 out of 100 points (-3.5 to 8.8), where a positive score favoured remotely delivered physiotherapy. The lower end of the 95% CI was greater than the non-inferiority margin. Whilst non-inferiority margins were not set for the secondary outcomes, the 95% CI of the mean between-group difference ruled out clinically meaningful differences. CONCLUSION: Remotely delivered physiotherapy with support via phone, text and an app is as good as face-to-face physiotherapy for the management of musculoskeletal conditions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12619000065190.en
dc.language.isoen_AUen
dc.rightsCopyright All Rights Reserveden
dc.subjectMusculoskeletal conditionsen
dc.subjectPhysical therapyen
dc.subject3205 Clinical Sciencesen
dc.titleRemotely delivered physiotherapy is as effective as face-to-face physiotherapy for musculoskeletal conditions (REFORM): a randomised trialen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jphys.2024.02.016
dc.relation.grantAPP1194105
usyd.facultyFaculty of Medicine and Health, School of Health Sciencesen
usyd.departmentInstitute for Musculoskeletal Healthen
usyd.citation.volume70
usyd.citation.issue2
usyd.citation.spage124


Show simple item record

Associated file/s

There are no files associated with this item.

Associated collections

Show simple item record

There are no previous versions of the item available.