Virtual Computer Vision Based Rehabilitation And In Person Physical Therapy Have Equivalent Outcomes After Knee Arthroscopy

Virtual Computer Vision Based Rehabilitation And In Person Physical Therapy Have Equivalent Outcomes After Knee Arthroscopy

Katherine L. Esser, BS, UNITED STATES Zachary I Li, BA, UNITED STATES Michael Moore, BA, UNITED STATES Larry Chen, BS, UNITED STATES Isabel Wolfe, BA, UNITED STATES Nathaniel P. Mercer, MD, UNITED STATES Bradley Austin Lezak, MD, MPH, UNITED STATES Heath Patrick Gould, MD, UNITED STATES Laith M. Jazrawi, MD, UNITED STATES Eric Strauss, UNITED STATES Guillem Gonzalez-Lomas, MD, UNITED STATES

NYU Langone Orthopedics, Manhattan, New York, UNITED STATES


2025 Congress   ePoster Presentation   2025 Congress   Not yet rated

 

Anatomic Location

Anatomic Structure

Treatment / Technique

Diagnosis Method

Sports Medicine


Summary: Telerehabilitation may be a viable alternative to traditional in-person physical therapy after arthroscopic meniscectomy, offering comparable improvements in pain, function, and patient satisfaction.


Purpose

Telerehabilitation involves video communication with real-time synchronous information exchange, closing geographic and motivational gaps to improve treatment protocol adherence. Novel computer vision platforms can track range of motion to augment telerehabilitation. This randomized controlled trial aims to compare the efficacy of computer vision-based telerehabilitation (TR) and traditional in-person physical therapy for postoperative rehabilitation following arthroscopic meniscectomy. It evaluates patient-reported outcomes, adherence to rehabilitation protocols, and patient satisfaction.

Methods

This single-center, two-arm, randomized controlled trial included patients undergoing arthroscopic meniscectomy between October 2011 and October 2023. Patients were randomized to either virtual rehabilitation or standard physical therapy. Baseline assessments were conducted preoperatively using visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome (KOOS) scores, and Tampa Kinesiophobia scores, with follow-up at 6 weeks postoperatively. A satisfaction questionnaire was also completed.

Results

Seventy-seven patients were randomized, with 38 available for 6-week follow-up. The median change in VAS pain score for TR was 20.00 [10.00 47.00], compared to 35.00 [12.00 52.00] for the control group, showing no statistically significant difference (p = 0.65, effect size = 23.97). KOOS subscale scores, Tampa Kinesiophobia scores, and return-to-sport rates were similar between groups. Satisfaction scores and adherence rates were high in both groups, with no significant differences observed.

Conclusion

Telerehabilitation may be a viable alternative to traditional in-person physical therapy, offering comparable improvements in pain, function, and patient satisfaction. Patient-reported outcomes at 6 weeks after meniscectomy were largely equivalent for computer vision-based telerehabilitation and in-person physical therapy. The study suggests that TR may provide clinically meaningful benefits and can overcome barriers associated with in-person therapy.