Evaluating the level of acceptability in telerehabilitation among people from low socioeconomic areas in Australia beyond COVID-19

Clarice Tang, Balwinder Sidhu, Golsa Saberi, Elise Baker
Purpose:

Primary aim is to evaluate differences in the level of acceptability in telerehabilitation between people from CALD and non-CALD groups who are receiving healthcare from a tertiary healthcare service. Secondary aims include evaluating differences in access and willingness to consider taking up telerehabilitation between CALD and non-CALD groups. 

Methods:

This study is conducted at an outpatient service that is providing care to people residing in one of the lower socioeconomic areas in New South Wales, Australia. Patients attending outpatient allied health services, including physiotherapy, from August 2022 to February 2023, were invited to complete a 16-item questionnaire that has been adapted from the Service User Technology Acceptability Questionnaire (SUTAQ). Additionally, questions related to demographic characteristics, access and willingness to engage in the use of telerehabilitation were included. Results were first descriptively analysed.  A one-way ANOVA was used to analyse the differences in scores on the SUTAQ between CALD and non-CALD groups. A Chi-Square analysis is conducted to analyse differences in access and willingness to consider telerehabilitation between the two groups of interest. 

Results:

A total of 249 participants completed the study. Of which, participants were of an average 57 years old (SD=20) and 64% of participants identified as female. Over half of the participants (n=132, 53%) had previous experience using telerehabilitation and 145 participants (58%) identified to be from a CALD background. Seventy three percent of participants (n=182) have access to Smart devices. Of the 16-item questionnaire, more than half of the participants either agreed or strongly agree that telerehabilitation is a time-saving option (59%) and makes it easier to fit appointments into the day (59%). Only 82 participants (33%) either agreed or strongly agree that telerehabilitation is a replacement of face-to-face rehabilitation services. Overall, only 138 participants (55%) indicated that they will be willing to engage in telerehabilitation. There were no significant differences in scores between groups on the SUTAQ, access and willingness to engage in telerehabilitation.  

Conclusion(s):

Despite having access and previous experience with telerehabilitation, it appears that many remained to perceive that telerehabilitation is not a replacement of face-to-face rehabilitation services. Being from a CALD background was not a factor that influenced uptake of telerehabilitation. 

Implications:
  •  Acceptability of telerehabilitation as a replacement of in-person therapies is low.
  • People from CALD background share similar attitudes and perception towards telerehabilitation as compared to people from non-CALD group.
Funding acknowledgements:
Western Sydney University Career Interruption Fund 2022.
Keywords:
Telerehabilitation
Acceptability
Culturally and Linguistically Diverse
Primary topic:
Disability and rehabilitation
Second topic:
Service delivery/emerging roles
Third topic:
Globalisation: health systems, policies and strategies
Did this work require ethics approval?:
Yes
Name the institution and ethics committee that approved your work:
South Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee on the 8th December 2021.
Provide the ethics approval number:
2020/ETH01959
Has any of this material been/due to be published or presented at another national or international conference prior to the World Physiotherapy Congress 2025?:
No

Back to the listing