Trial reportPloS one2026
Telemedicine for rotator cuff syndrome: Asynchronous exercise and remote follow-up in a randomized controlled study.
Trial report in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionRotator cuff syndrome (RCS) is a common musculoskeletal condition that requires rehabilitation. Telemedicine involving asynchronous exercise video and remote follow-up has emerged as a potential alternative to conventional in-person rehabilitation, offering advantages in accessibility and cost-effectiveness. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of telemedicine compared to conventional methods in the rehabilitation of RCS.
methodsThis randomized controlled trial was conducted at a public hospital physiatry clinic between November 2023 and June 2024. The telemedicine group (TG) received asynchronous exercise videos and remote video-call follow-ups; the control group (CG) received illustrated exercise brochures and in-person follow-ups. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 15th day, and 6th month. The primary outcomes were pain (measured using the Visual Analog Scale, VAS) and functional levels (assessed using the Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, QuickDASH). Secondary outcomes included exercise adherence, satisfaction, and travel burden. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models.
resultsTrial included 90 patients (mean age 51.19 ± 7.07 years), randomly assigned to TG (n = 45) or CG (n = 45). Both groups demonstrated within-group improvements in VAS (mean change -1.88 [95% CI -2.56 to -1.20]) and QuickDASH (-15.6 [95% CI -21.0 to -10.2]) scores from baseline to 15th day (p < 0.001) and in VAS from baseline to 6th month (-4.82 [95% CI -5.50 to -4.13], p < 0.001). No between-group differences were found in pain reduction at 15th day (estimate = -0.27, 95% CI -1.44 to 0.89, p = 0.645) or at 6th month (estimate = -0.40, 95% CI -1.57 to 0.77, p = 0.499), nor in functional improvement at 15th day (estimate = -2.68, 95% CI -12.90 to 7.57, p = 0.607). The TG demonstrated higher exercise adherence (p = 0.027) and satisfaction (p < 0.001). Based on predefined minimal clinically important difference thresholds, all group differences fell within non-inferiority margins. The cost-effectiveness of telemedicine was 266.4 km and 1325.6 minutes saved per unit of VAS, and 11.34 km and 56.41 minutes saved per unit of QuickDASH improvement.
conclusionTelemedicine is a viable alternative to traditional management of RCS, providing comparable pain relief, functional outcomes, and reduced travel burden. Future studies should assess long-term effects and broader populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.