{"doi":"10.1016/j.asmr.2023.01.006","title":"Despite Equivalent Clinical Outcomes, Patients Report Less Satisfaction With Telerehabilitation Versus Standard In‐Office Rehabilitation After Arthroscopic Meniscectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial","abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Purpose</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To evaluate functional outcomes and satisfaction in patients who underwent telerehabilitation (telerehab) compared with in‐person rehabilitation after arthroscopic meniscectomy.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>A randomized‐controlled trial was conducted including patients scheduled to undergo arthroscopic meniscectomy for meniscal injury by 1 of 5 fellowship‐trained sports medicine surgeons between September 2020 and October 2021. Patients were randomized to receive telerehab, defined as exercises and stretches provided by trained physical therapists over a synchronous face‐to‐face video visit or in‐person rehabilitation for their postoperative course. International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC) score and satisfaction metrics were collected at baseline and 3 months postoperatively.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Analysis was conducted on 60 patients with 3‐month follow‐up outcomes. There were no significant differences in IKDC scores between groups at baseline (\n                      <jats:italic>P</jats:italic>\n                       = .211) and 3 months’ postoperatively (\n                      <jats:italic>P</jats:italic>\n                       = .065). Patients were more likely to report being satisfied with their rehabilitation group 73% vs. 100% (\n                      <jats:italic>P</jats:italic>\n                       = .044) if there were in the in‐person group. Satisfaction differed significantly between the 2 groups at the end of their rehabilitation course, and only 64% of those in the telerehab group would elect to undergo telerehab again for future indications. Furthermore, they believed that future rehabilitation would benefit from a hybrid model.\n                    </jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Telerehab showed no difference versus traditional in‐person rehabilitation in terms of functional outcomes up to 3 months after arthroscopic meniscectomy. However, patients were less satisfied with telerehab.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Level of Evidence</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>I, randomized controlled trial.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>","journal":"Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation","year":2023,"id":681029,"datarank":0.38474240361923057,"base_score":2.5649493574615367,"endowment":2.5649493574615367,"self_citation_contribution":0.38474240361923057,"citation_network_contribution":0.0,"self_endowment_contribution":0.38474240361923057,"citer_contribution":0.0,"corpus_percentile":null,"corpus_rank":null,"citation_count":12,"citer_count":0,"citers_with_citation_signal":0,"citers_with_endowment":0,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"is_dataset":false,"is_dataset_confidence":null,"is_data_producer":false,"deposit_databanks":null,"is_oa":false,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"has_version_chain":false,"published_date":null,"fair_score":null,"fair_percentile":null,"algorithm_id":"datarank_citation_only_1hop_v6","ranking_scope":"data_only","authors":[{"id":1303439,"name":"Kinjal Vasavada","orcid":"0000-0002-1450-8417","position":1,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1456664,"name":"Eoghan T. Hurley","orcid":"0000-0002-7696-2981","position":2,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1229282,"name":"Charles C. Lin","orcid":"0000-0002-1491-6410","position":3,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1779322,"name":"Scott Buzin","orcid":null,"position":4,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1779323,"name":"Guillem Gonzalez‐Lomas","orcid":null,"position":5,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1779324,"name":"Michael J. Alaia","orcid":null,"position":6,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":131141,"name":"Eric J. Strauss","orcid":null,"position":7,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1303441,"name":"Laith M. Jazrawi","orcid":"0000-0001-6417-9968","position":8,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1779325,"name":"Kirk A. Campbell","orcid":null,"position":9,"is_corresponding":false},{"id":1779321,"name":"Edward S. Mojica","orcid":null,"position":0,"is_corresponding":false}],"reference_count":0,"raw_metadata":{"has_enrichment":true,"resolved":true,"title":"Despite Equivalent Clinical Outcomes, Patients Report Less Satisfaction With Telerehabilitation Versus Standard In‐Office Rehabilitation After Arthroscopic Meniscectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial","abstract":"<jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Purpose</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>To evaluate functional outcomes and satisfaction in patients who underwent telerehabilitation (telerehab) compared with in‐person rehabilitation after arthroscopic meniscectomy.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Methods</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>A randomized‐controlled trial was conducted including patients scheduled to undergo arthroscopic meniscectomy for meniscal injury by 1 of 5 fellowship‐trained sports medicine surgeons between September 2020 and October 2021. Patients were randomized to receive telerehab, defined as exercises and stretches provided by trained physical therapists over a synchronous face‐to‐face video visit or in‐person rehabilitation for their postoperative course. International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (IKDC) score and satisfaction metrics were collected at baseline and 3 months postoperatively.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Results</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>\n                      Analysis was conducted on 60 patients with 3‐month follow‐up outcomes. There were no significant differences in IKDC scores between groups at baseline (\n                      <jats:italic>P</jats:italic>\n                       = .211) and 3 months’ postoperatively (\n                      <jats:italic>P</jats:italic>\n                       = .065). Patients were more likely to report being satisfied with their rehabilitation group 73% vs. 100% (\n                      <jats:italic>P</jats:italic>\n                       = .044) if there were in the in‐person group. Satisfaction differed significantly between the 2 groups at the end of their rehabilitation course, and only 64% of those in the telerehab group would elect to undergo telerehab again for future indications. Furthermore, they believed that future rehabilitation would benefit from a hybrid model.\n                    </jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Conclusions</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>Telerehab showed no difference versus traditional in‐person rehabilitation in terms of functional outcomes up to 3 months after arthroscopic meniscectomy. However, patients were less satisfied with telerehab.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>\n                  <jats:sec>\n                    <jats:title>Level of Evidence</jats:title>\n                    <jats:p>I, randomized controlled trial.</jats:p>\n                  </jats:sec>","is_dataset_classified":null,"base_score":0.0,"endowment":0.0,"datacite_reuse_total":0,"file_count":0,"downloads":0,"views":0,"has_version_chain":false,"is_dataset":false,"is_oa":false,"pmid":"37101883","pmcid":"PMC10123434","openalex_id":null,"authors":[],"funders":[],"total_grants":0,"fwci":null,"citation_percentile":null,"influential_citations":0,"citation_trend":[],"oa_status":"gold","license":"cc-by-nc-nd","oa_locations":[{"url":"http://arthroscopysportsmedicineandrehabilitation.org/article/S2666061X23000068/pdf","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S2666061X23000068?httpAccept=text/xml","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S2666061X23000068?httpAccept=text/plain","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://arthroscopyjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1016/j.asmr.2023.01.006","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://arthroscopyjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full-xml/10.1016/j.asmr.2023.01.006","host_type":"publisher"},{"url":"https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10123434/pdf/main.pdf","host_type":"repository"}],"fields_of_study":[],"mesh_terms":[],"keywords":[],"sdg_mappings":[],"linked_datasets":[],"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"database_accessions":[{"name":"nct"},{"name":"doi"}],"source":"live","citation_network_status":"fetched"},"created_at":"2026-08-17T16:46:14.637767Z","pmid":null,"pmcid":null,"fwci":null,"citation_percentile":null,"influential_citations":0,"oa_status":null,"license":null,"views":0,"total_file_size_bytes":0,"version_count":0,"fair_f":null,"fair_a":null,"fair_i":null,"fair_r":null,"fair_zscore":null,"fair_rationale":null,"fair_model":null,"fair_agent_version":null,"fair_fulltext_source":null,"fair_has_llm":null,"fair_computed_at":null,"clinical_trials":[],"software_tools":[],"db_accessions":[],"linked_datasets":[],"topics":[]}