Skip to main content
. 2021 Feb 18;31(2):627–636. doi: 10.1007/s40670-021-01234-w

Table 4.

Attitude characteristics of the respondents (N = 200)

Item Disagree n (%) Agree n (%)
Am comfortable with telerehabilitation applications 57 (28.5) 143 (71.5)
I have issues with number of capable internet devices like smartphone, tablets, and computer as am not use to them 48 (24) 152 (76)
Telerehabilitation is convenient as I may not have to leave my environment 52 (27.5) 148 (72.5)
I find it easy to learn and use telerehabilitation system 45 (22.5) 155 (77.5)
I believe I could be more productive quickly using Telerehabilitation 42 (21) 158 (79)
The way I interact with telerehabilitation system is satisfactory 34 (13) 166 (83)
I like using telerehabilitation systems 29 (14.5) 171 (85.5)
Telerehabilitation systems are simple and easy to understand 107 (53.5) 91 ( 46.5)
Telerehabilitation system is able to do everything I would want it to be able to do 104 (52) 96 (48)
Telerehabilitation will help in easy access to health for rural patients 84 (42) 116 (58)
I presume patients would feel comfortable in being treated by Telerehabilitation 102 (51) 97 (48.5)
Telerehabilitation can never replace face-to-face consultation 66 (30) 133 (66.5)
I could not rely on a consultation via telerehabilitation 99 (49.5) 98 (49)
I will accept telerehabilitation only after seeing reports of patients being treated by it 79 (39.5) 121 (60.5)
Due to lack of sufficient knowledge of telerehabilitation technology and application I am unable to practice it 105 (52.5) 95 (47.5)
Due to the large number of patients in my practice, I am not interested in Telerehabilitation 153(76.5) 47 (23.5)
Telerehabilitation is a waste of my valuable time 169 (84.5) 31 (15.5)
If a charge is made for telerehabilitation then I will use it 107 (53.5) 92 (46)
I felt I was able to express myself effectively using telerehabilitation system 122 (61) 78 (39)