Export file:


  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text


  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

Predicting interest to use mobile-device telerehabilitation (mRehab) by baby-boomers with stroke

1 Research Rehabilitation Program, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Canada
2 Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
3 Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC Canada

Special Issues: Telerehabilitation for Adults and Older Adults

Context and purpose: Demand for stroke rehabilitation services are reaching unprecedented levels due to an overall population aging, driven by the aging of the baby-boomer generation. Delivery of rehabilitation via mobile-device technologies may provide advantages towards meeting the increasing demands on the rehabilitation system by providing individuals with rehabilitation services in their homes and communities. The aim of this paper is to gain an understanding of the interest of current baby-boomers with stroke to use mobile-device technology to receive rehabilitation services such as education, assessments and exercise programs (mRehab). Methods: People living in the community with stroke born between 1946 and 1964 (i.e., baby-boomer generation) who participated in a larger telerehabilitation survey were included in this study. Regression modeling was used to evaluate personal, health/disability and technological predictors of interest to use mobile-devices for telerehabilitation. Results and significance: Fifty people with stroke, mean age 62.7 (4.4) years, 58% male, 54.2% with moderate or moderately severe disability were included; 86% had access to a mobile phone or tablet. Regression analysis resulted in statistically significant personal (education, β = 0.29 [95% CI = 0.05 to 1.11], population of residence, β = 0.30 [95% CI = 0.07 to 0.69]), health (comorbid conditions, β = 0.30 [95% CI = 0.02 to 0.20]) technology (ownership, β = 0.26 [95% CI = 0.01 to 0.86] and attitude towards telerehabilitation, β = 0.25 [95% CI = 0.01 to 0.79]) predictors of interest to use mobile-devices for telerehabilitation (R2 = 33.1%).
This study identifies personal, health and technological factors which predict interest of baby-boomers with stroke with ongoing and complex health needs to use mRehab. Health professionals can use this information as they integrate mRehab into their practice and inform future development of mRehab solutions.
  Article Metrics


1. Kelly-Hayes M, Beiser A, Kase CS, et al. (2003) The influence of gender and age on disability following ischemic stroke: The Framingham study. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 12: 119–126.

2. Wolfe CDA (2000) The impact of stroke. Brit Med Bull 56: 275–286.

3. Bray BD, Paley L, Hoffman A, et al. (2018) Socioeconomic disparities in first stroke incidence, quality of care, and survival: A nationwide registry-based cohort study of 44 million adults in England. Lancet Pub Health 3: e185–e193.    

4. Schaefer M (2015) Aging Baby-boomers: Future Effects on City Housing and Suburban Planning. https://spea.indiana.edu/doc/undergraduate/ugrd_thesis2015_pol_schaefer.pdf

5. Weinstein RS, Lopez AM, Joseph BA, et al. (2014) Telemedicine, telehealth, and mobile health applications that work: Opportunities and barriers. Am J Med 127: 183–187.    

6. Tuot DS, Boulware LE (2017) Telehealth applications to enhance CKD knowledge and awareness among patients and providers. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 24: 39–45.    

7. Kay M, Santos J, Takane M (2011) mHealth: New horizons for health through mobile technologies. WHO 64: 66–71.

8. Nacinovich M (2011) Defining mHealth. J Commun Health 4: 1–3.    

9. Williams V, Price J, Hardinge M, et al. (2014) Using a mobile health application to support self-management in COPD: A qualitative study. Br J Gen Pract 64: e392–e400.    

10. Singh K, Drouin K, Newmark LP, et al. (2016) Developing a framework for evaluating the patient engagement, quality, and safety of mobile health applications. Issue Brief 5: 11.

11. Jenkins C, Burkett NS, Ovbiagele B, et al. (2016) Stroke patients and their attitudes toward mHealth monitoring to support blood pressure control and medication adherence. mHealth 2: 24

12. White J, Janssen H, Jordan L, et al. (2015) Tablet technology during stroke recovery: A survivor's perspective. Disabil Rehabil 37: 1186–1192.    

13. Kratzke C, Amatya A, Vilchis H (2014) Differences Among College Women for Breast Cancer Prevention Acquired Information-Seeking, Desired Apps and Texts, and Daughter-Initiated Information to Mothers. J Commun Health 39: 291–300.    

14. Edgar MC, Monsees S, Rhebergen J, et al. (2016) Telerehabilitation in Stroke Recovery: A Survey on Access and Willingness to Use Low-Cost Consumer Technologies. Telemed J E Health 23: 421–429.

15. Wilson JT, Hareendran A, Grant M, et al. (2002) Improving the assessment of outcomes in stroke: use of a structured interview to assign grades on the modified Rankin Scale. Stroke 33: 2243–2246.    

16. Banks JL, Marotta CA (2007) Outcomes validity and reliability of the modified Rankin scale: Implications for stroke clinical trials: A literature review and synthesis. Stroke 38: 1091–1096.    

17. Groll DL, To T, Bombardier C, et al. (2005) The development of a comorbidity index with physical function as the outcome. J Clin Epidemiol 58: 595–602.    

18. Ginis KA, Arbour-Nicitopoulos KP, Latimer-Cheung AE, et al. (2012) Predictors of leisure time physical activity among people with spinal cord injury. Ann Behav Med 44: 104–118.    

19. Sakakibara BM, Miller WC, Eng JJ, et al. (2015) Health, Personal, and Environmental Predictors of Wheelchair-Use Confidence in Adult Wheelchair Users. Phys Ther 95: 1365–1373.    

20. Norman GR, Streiner DL (1994) Biostatistics: The bare essentials. B.c.decker 302: 2261–2262.

21. Portney LG, Watkins MP (2008) Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice, United States: Prentice Hall.

22. Lang TA, Altman DG (2013) Basic statistical reporting for articles published in biomedical journals: The "Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature" or the "SAMPL Guidelines". Europ Assoc Sci Eds 256: 256.

23. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, et al. (2007) G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Meth 39: 175–191.    

24. Lang TA, Altman DG (2013) Basic statistical reporting for articles published in biomedical journals: The "Statistical Analyses and Methods in the Published Literature" or the SAMPL Guidelines". Int J Nurs Stud 52: 5–9.

25. Wildevuur SE, Simonse LW (2015) Information and communication technology-enabled person-centered care for the "big five" chronic conditions: Scoping review. J Med Int Res 17: e77.

26. Fisk GD, Owsley C, Pulley LV (1997) Driving after stroke: Driving exposure, advice, and evaluations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 78: 1338–1345.    

27. Fleming C (2005) Meet the mature market. Point Credit Union Res Adv 70: 118–119.

© 2018 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Article outline

Show full outline
Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved