Table 3.
| Author | Study design | Disease/condition specific group | Name of PROM | Summary of findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Riegler et al. [98] | Cohort | Mental Health | Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) | Veterans reported significant reduction in symptoms of depressions after the telepsychotherapy parenting skills intervention |
| Eyberg Child Behavior Inventory | Frequency of clinically significant scores pre- and post-treatment were significantly different | |||
| Levinson et al. [103] | Cohort | Beck Depression Inventory II | Changes in BDI scores were not significantly different between in-person and virtual groups | |
| The Frost Multidimensional Perfectionism Scale (FMPS) | Changes in FMPS scores were not significantly different between in-person and virtual groups (pre to post treatment) | |||
| Bulkes et al. [108] | Cohort | Quick Inventory of Depression Symptomology-Self Report (QIDS-SR) | Admission and discharge QIDS-SR scores for the in-person and virtual care groups were not significantly different | |
| Zimmermann et al. [63] | Cross sectional | Remission from Depression Questionnaire (RDQ) | Significant improvements in RDQ scores between time points were recorded for virtual relative in in-person care | |
| Raykos et al. [92] | Case series | PROMIS-Anxiety and Depression scales, Short Form 8a | Statistically significant improvements in PROMIS scores were reported as therapy progressed | |
| Eating Disorders-15 Questionnaire (ED-15) | Statistically significant improvements in ED-15 scores were reported as therapy progressed | |||
|
Raykos et al. [92] Levinson et al. [103] Steiger et al. [104] |
Case series Cohort |
Eating Disorder Examination Question Version 4.0 (EDE-Q-IV) | Levinson and Steiger et al. reported that changes in EDE-Q-IV scores were not significantly different between in-person and virtual groups. Raykos et al., found statistically significant improvements in EDE-Q-IV scoring as therapy progressed | |
| Rezich et al. [109] | Cross sectional | Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) | Patient responsiveness to telehealth was unconnected to their respective HADS score | |
|
Piro et al. [69] Craig et al. [90] Steiger et al. [104] Graziano et al. [99] |
Cohort Experimental |
Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) | Craig et al. [90], reported no significant difference in GAD-7 scores between satisfied and unsatisfied patients. Graziano et al. [99], showed significant reductions in depression at the two time points. Lastly, Steiger et al. [104], calculated negligible interactions between the mode of care delivery and GAD scoring | |
| van Agteren et al. [100] | Experimental | Mental Health Continuum Short Form (MHC-SF) | Participants reported mental well-being improvements before and after exposure to virtual care | |
| Ahmad et al. [91] | Cohort | Gastrointestinal | Baylor Continence Score (BCS) | BCS scores significantly improved following the virtual Bowel Movement Program |
| Cleveland Clinic Constipation Score (CCCS) | CCCS scores did not significantly improve following the virtual Bowel Movement Program | |||
| Vancouver Symptom Score for Dysfunctional Elimination Syndrome (VSS) | Significant improvements in VSS scores were reported at the 1-month and 3-month follow-up time points | |||
| Sabbagh et al.[102] | Cohort | Musculoskeletal | American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form | No significant difference in outcomes were reported between the virtual and in-person care groups |
| Ganderton et al. [94] | Longitudinal (pre-post intervention) | Melbourne Instability Shoulder Scale (MISS) | Significant and clinically relevant improvements in MISS scores were reported at follow-up | |
| Short form Orebro Musculoskeletal Pain Questionnaire (ÖMSPQ) | Significant improvements in patient scores were reported at all follow-up meetings | |||
| Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) | Excluding the physical subsection of the PROM, patients reported significant improvements in their WOSI scores | |||
| Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia | The scale reported clinically significant reductions in pain-related fear at the 6-week and 12-week time points | |||
| Alsobayel et al. [95] | Cross sectional | Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ) | Significant improvements in the MSK-HQ were recorded between baseline and follow-up | |
| Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire | Significant improvements in the Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire were recorded between baseline and follow-up | |||
| Wu et al. [106] | Cohort | Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT)—Fatigue Scale | A significant increase in FACIT scores were reported after treatment | |
| Craig et al. [90] | Cohort | Neck Disability Index (NDI) | No significant difference in NDI scores were reported between satisfied and unsatisfied patients | |
| Oswestry Disability Index | No significant difference in Disability Index scores were reported between satisfied and unsatisfied patients | |||
| Corona et al. [107] | Cohort | Early Childhood Development | MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventory (MCDI) | No statistically significant findings were reported between the in-person and virtual treatment groups |
| Lai et al. [96] | Experimental | Neurological | Quality of Life in Alzheimer's Disease (QoL-AD) | Significant improvements in QoL-AD scoring were reported for video calling relatively in audio-only meetings |
| Revised Memory and Behavior Problem Checklist (RMBPC) | No significant improvements in RMBPC scoring were reported for video calling relatively in audio-only meetings | |||
| Daswani et al. [97] | Case series | Respiratory | St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) | An average SGRQ improvement of 71% was reported by patients |
| Generic PROMs | ||||
| Raykos et al. [92] | Case series | N/A | Clinical Impairment Assessment (CIA) | Large decreases in patient-reported impairment was recorded |
| Thesenvitz et al. [105] | Cohort | EuroQol Five Dimension—Five Level (EQ-5D-5L) | Reported no statistically significant difference in scores between baseline and follow-up | |
|
Sabbagh et al. [102] Wu et al. [106] |
Cohort | EuroQol Five Dimension—Three Level (EQ-5D-3L) | Wu et al., reported no significant difference in patient scores before and after treatment. Sabbagh et al., found no significant difference in scoring between in-person and virtual treatment groups | |
| Lotan et al. [93] | Case series | Goal Attainment Scale (GAS) | Improvements in patient outcomes were reported in those receiving virtual care | |
|
Craig et al.[90] Steiger et al. [104] Graziano et al. [99] |
Cohort Experimental |
Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) | Craig et al., reported no significant difference in PHQ-9 scores between satisfied and unsatisfied patients. Graziano et al., showed significant reductions in depression at the two time points. Lastly, Steiger et al., calculated negligible interactions between the mode of care delivery and PHQ-9 scoring | |
| Alsobayel et al. [95] | Cross sectional | Patient-Specific Functional Scale | Significant improvements in the Patient-Specific Functional Scale were recorded between baseline and follow-up | |
| Ahmad et al. [91] | Cohort | Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory (PedsQL) | No statistically or clinically significant improvements in PedsQL scores were reported | |
| Bulkes et al. [108] | Cohort | Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire—Short Form (Q-LES-Q) | Admission and discharge Q-LES-Q scores for the in-person and virtual care groups were not significantly different | |
| van Agteren et al. [100] | Experimental | Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) | Participants reported in increase in mental well-being before and after exposure to virtual care | |
|
Bernocchi et al. [101] Sabbagh et al. [102] |
Cohort | Short form (SF-12) Quality of Life Questionnaire | Sabbagh et al., found no significant difference in scoring between in-person and virtual treatment groups. Bernocchi et al., reported a significant improvement in the mental component but not the physical component of the survey | |
| Lai et al. [96] | Experimental | Short Form 36 Version 2 (SF-36v2) Quality of Life Questionnaire | Significant improvements in SF-36v2 scoring were reported for video calling relatively in audio-only meetings | |
| Zarit Burden Interview Scale (ZBI) | Significant improvements in ZBI scoring were reported for video calling relatively in audio-only meetings | |||
| Riegler et al. [98] | Cohort | Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) | Statistically significant improvements in the SDQ were reported pre- and post-treatment | |
| Craig et al. [90] | Cohort | Visual Analog Scale (VAS) | No significant difference in VAS scores were reported between satisfied and unsatisfied patients |
Included surveys: [38]