Current Technology Developments Can Improve the Quality of Research and Level of Evidence for Rehabilitation Interventions: A Narrative Review

Author:

Bonnechère BrunoORCID,Timmermans AnnickORCID,Michiels Sarah

Abstract

The current important limitations to the implementation of Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) in the rehabilitation field are related to the validation process of interventions. Indeed, most of the strict guidelines that have been developed for the validation of new drugs (i.e., double or triple blinded, strict control of the doses and intensity) cannot—or can only partially—be applied in rehabilitation. Well-powered, high-quality randomized controlled trials are more difficult to organize in rehabilitation (e.g., longer duration of the intervention in rehabilitation, more difficult to standardize the intervention compared to drug validation studies, limited funding since not sponsored by big pharma companies), which reduces the possibility of conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, as currently high levels of evidence are sparse. The current limitations of EBP in rehabilitation are presented in this narrative review, and innovative solutions are suggested, such as technology-supported rehabilitation systems, continuous assessment, pragmatic trials, rehabilitation treatment specification systems, and advanced statistical methods, to tackle the current limitations. The development and implementation of new technologies can increase the quality of research and the level of evidence supporting rehabilitation, provided some adaptations are made to our research methodology.

Publisher

MDPI AG

Subject

Electrical and Electronic Engineering,Biochemistry,Instrumentation,Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics,Analytical Chemistry

Reference108 articles.

1. Feinstein, A.R. (1967). Clinical Judgment, Williams & Wilkins.

2. Cochrane, A.L. (1999). Effectiveness & Efficiency: Random Reflections on Health Services, RSM Books. New.

3. History and Development of Evidence-Based Medicine;Claridge;World J. Surg.,2005

4. Clinical Medicine Meets Modern Epidemiology—And Both Profit;Fletcher;Ann. Epidemiol.,1992

5. Epidemiology, Evidenced-Based Medicine, and Evidence-Based Public Health;Jenicek;J. Epidemiol.,1997

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3