Is a telerehabilitation programme for older adults with hip fracture associated with burden of family caregivers who provide support?

The project Activating older people after a hip fracture (ActiveHip+) has been supported by EIT Health (210752) and the Foundation for Progress and Health, Ministry of Andalusia, Spain (PI-0372-2014). ; Objective: @ctivehip is a home-based multidisciplinary telerehabilitation programme for older adults with hip fracture, conducted with the assistance of their family caregivers. This programme was useful in improving their functional recovery. Nevertheless, we were concerned about how the programme might have affected caregivers, whose assistance was essential for supporting older adults in using new technologies and ensuring their safety during the exercises and activities at home. The aim of the present study was to compare the burden, psychological factors and physical fitness of the family caregivers of older adults who opted the @ctivehip telerehabilitation programme versus those family caregivers of older adults who received the face-to-face rehabilitation provided by the Andalusian Public Healthcare System (in Spain). Methods: In this single-blinded, non-randomized clinical trial, participants were older adults with hip fracture and their family caregivers. The telerehabilitation group (n = 30) underwent a 12-week multidisciplinary telerehabilitation programme, and the comparative group (n = 32) received face-to-face rehabilitation. Caregivers outcomes measured were (i) the burden using the Zarit Burden Interview, (ii) the anxiety and depression with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and (iii) the Physical Fitness with the International Fitness Scale (IFIS). Results: There were not statistically significant differences on caregiver burden between family caregivers in the @ctivehip and the comparative group, although there was a trend towards lower values [[Mean (95%CI); 14.73 (9.09 to 20.37) vs 16.03 (10.63 to 21.43); p = 0.771] as well as for anxiety and depression [5.66 (3.21 to 8.78) vs 11.19 (8.52 to 13.86); p = 0.022]. Likewise achieved better, though not statistically significant, ...