Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 2, 2026
Application of Bedside Lower Extremity Rehabilitation Robots in Stroke Rehabilitation: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Published on: November 28, 2025
Effect of Telerehabilitation on the Capacity, Motor Performance, and Participation of Infants Aged 0-2 Years with
Tatiane Schlichting1, Rosa Isabel Fonseca Ângulo Stein1, Camila Resende Gâmbaro Lima1
1Departamento de Fisioterapia, Universidade Federal de São Carlos - UFSCAR, São Carlos, Brasil.
Insights
Telerehabilitation benefits motor skills and participation in infants at risk for developmental delay. However, more standardized research is needed to confirm its equivalence to in-person interventions.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Rehabilitation
- Developmental Pediatrics
- Health Services Research
Background:
- Infants at biological risk require timely motor interventions to optimize development.
- Telerehabilitation offers a potential alternative to traditional in-person therapy.
- Evidence comparing telerehabilitation with in-person interventions for this population is limited.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically review research on the effectiveness of telerehabilitation for motor interventions in at-risk infants.
- To compare motor capacity, performance, and participation outcomes between telerehabilitation and control conditions.
- To assess the impact of remote delivery on developmental trajectories in infants aged 0-2 years.
Main Methods:
- Systematic search of major databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, etc.) up to March 2025.
- Inclusion of randomized clinical trials comparing telerehabilitation with in-person or remote caregiver guidance.
- Focus on studies involving infants at biological risk for developmental delay.
Main Results:
- Four high-quality randomized clinical trials (n=105 infants) were included.
- Telerehabilitation interventions utilized video calls, phone, or text messaging.
- Both telerehabilitation and in-person groups showed improvements in motor outcomes and participation; motor performance was not directly assessed.
Conclusions:
- Telerehabilitation demonstrates positive effects on motor capacity and participation in at-risk infants.
- Methodological heterogeneity and lack of standardized comparative studies limit definitive conclusions on modality equivalence.
- Further research with standardized protocols is necessary to establish telerehabilitation's role.
Objective:
This study systematically reviewed research on the effects of motor interventions delivered via telerehabilitation, compared with control conditions, on motor capacity, performance, and participation in infants at biological risk for developmental delay from birth to two years of age.
Methods:
A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Virtual Health Library, and CINAHL until March 2025. Studies investigating motor interventions via telerehabilitation compared to in-person or remote caregiver guidance were included.
Results:
Four randomized clinical trials (n = 105 infants) of high methodological quality were included. Interventions used video calls, phone, or text messaging. Both telerehabilitation and in-person groups improved in motor outcomes and participation. In-person assessments predominated, mainly using the Alberta Infant Motor Scale. None of the studies directly assessed motor performance. Additionally, variations in therapeutic approach, goals, caregiver involvement, and dosage between telerehabilitation and in-person groups within studies (1-7 sessions/week, 30-45 min, for 4-14 weeks) limited the attribution of effects to the mode of delivery.
Conclusions:
Telerehabilitation shows positive effects on motor capacity and participation in at-risk infants, but methodological heterogeneity and the lack of standardized studies comparing remote and in-person interventions limits conclusions about the equivalence of these modalities.
