Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Telemedicine exercise program shows comparable pain and function outcomes to in-person care for rotator cuff syndromeShoulder Rehab Through Your Phone Works Just as Well as Clinic Visits

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Consider telemedicine as a non-inferior alternative for rotator cuff syndrome exercise management.

This randomized controlled trial evaluated telemedicine versus traditional in-person care for rotator cuff syndrome in 90 patients (mean age 51.19 ± 7.07 years) at a public hospital physiatry clinic. The telemedicine group received asynchronous exercise videos and remote video-call follow-ups, while the control group received illustrated exercise brochures and in-person follow-ups. Primary outcomes were pain (Visual Analog Scale, VAS) and functional levels (Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, QuickDASH) assessed at 15 days and 6 months.

For pain reduction, there were no between-group differences at 15 days (estimate = -0.27, 95% CI -1.44 to 0.89, p = 0.645) or 6 months (estimate = -0.40, 95% CI -1.57 to 0.77, p = 0.499). Similarly, functional improvement showed no between-group difference at 15 days (estimate = -2.68, 95% CI -12.90 to 7.57, p = 0.607). Secondary outcomes favored telemedicine: exercise adherence was higher (p = 0.027), satisfaction was higher (p < 0.001), and travel burden was reduced (266.4 km and 1325.6 minutes saved per unit of VAS improvement; 11.34 km and 56.41 minutes saved per unit of QuickDASH improvement).

Safety and tolerability were not reported. Limitations include that long-term effects beyond 6 months were not assessed, broader populations were not assessed, and while within-group improvements were reported, between-group differences were not significant for primary outcomes. The randomized controlled trial design supports causal inference, and all group differences fell within non-inferiority margins based on predefined minimal clinically important difference thresholds.

For practice, telemedicine appears a viable alternative to traditional management, providing comparable pain relief and functional outcomes with reduced travel burden. However, applicability may be limited to similar patient populations, and clinicians should note the lack of long-term data and unreported safety information.

A Very Common, Very Disruptive Condition

Rotator cuff syndrome (RCS) — pain and weakness in the shoulder caused by injury or irritation to the tendons around the joint — is one of the most common reasons people see a physical medicine doctor. It affects millions of people each year, limiting everything from reaching overhead to sleeping comfortably.

Standard treatment is rehabilitation: specific exercises to strengthen and stabilize the shoulder. But for many people, regularly attending in-person therapy is a real barrier. Rural patients, those with demanding schedules, or people with limited transportation all struggle to follow through with the recommended course of care.

The Old Assumption About Rehab

The traditional view in rehabilitation medicine has been that hands-on, in-person care is superior. A therapist who can watch you move, correct your form, and encourage you is hard to replace. Paper brochures sent home with patients have long been a weak substitute.

But here's the twist: what if the key ingredient isn't the clinic itself, but the quality of the instruction and the consistency of follow-up? This trial tested exactly that — replacing the brochure with exercise videos and replacing the in-person check-in with a video call.

Think of it like having a personal coach available on demand. Instead of driving to a clinic, patients in the telemedicine group watched professionally filmed exercise videos showing them exactly how to perform each movement. They also checked in with their provider via scheduled video calls — real-time conversations where questions could be asked and concerns addressed.

The key word here is "asynchronous" — the exercise videos could be watched at any time, on any device, without needing to coordinate schedules. This mirrors how many people already use fitness apps, but applied to medically supervised rehabilitation.

What the Study Tested

This randomized controlled trial enrolled 90 patients with rotator cuff syndrome at a public hospital physiatry (physical medicine) clinic in Turkey, running from November 2023 to June 2024. Half received the telemedicine approach — video exercises plus remote follow-up calls. The other half got the traditional approach — illustrated brochures and in-person visits. Both groups were followed at 15 days and again at six months. Researchers measured pain, shoulder function, exercise adherence, patient satisfaction, and travel burden.

Both groups improved substantially. Pain scores dropped significantly in both groups by day 15 and continued improving through six months. Shoulder function scores also improved comparably. When researchers ran formal statistical comparisons, the differences between the two groups were small enough to fall within what's called the "non-inferiority margin" — meaning telemedicine was not meaningfully worse than in-person care.

But the telemedicine group had one clear advantage: patients stuck to their exercises more consistently (statistically significantly better adherence) and reported higher satisfaction with their care. They also saved an estimated 266 kilometers and over 22 hours of travel per patient per unit of pain improvement.

The telemedicine group matched the clinic group in outcomes — and outperformed them in engagement and convenience.

That's Not the Full Picture

The efficiency gains here matter beyond individual convenience. In healthcare systems that are already stretched — where clinic slots are limited and patients travel long distances for specialist care — a validated remote rehab option could extend the reach of physical medicine services to people who currently go without.

What This Adds to the Field

This is one of the first randomized controlled trials specifically testing asynchronous video exercise delivery for rotator cuff syndrome. Prior telemedicine rehab studies often relied on synchronous (scheduled, real-time) sessions that still require coordinating timing. The asynchronous model studied here is more flexible and scalable — and it held up clinically.

If you have rotator cuff syndrome and have been prescribed physical therapy, it may be worth asking your doctor whether a telemedicine rehab option is available. Not all clinics offer this yet, but the evidence now supports it as a legitimate alternative. If in-person access is easy for you and you prefer direct contact, there's no reason to switch. But if logistics are a barrier, remote rehab should not be seen as a lesser option.

Limitations to Know

This trial was conducted at a single hospital over eight months, and all patients were under 65, with a mean age of 51. Results may not apply as well to older patients or those with more severe rotator cuff damage. The six-month follow-up window also doesn't tell us what happens at one year or beyond. Longer-term data is still needed.

The researchers call for future studies that include older patients, more diverse populations, and longer follow-up periods. There's also interest in exploring whether fully app-based programs — without any scheduled video calls — could produce similar results. If the evidence continues to build, telemedicine rehab for shoulder conditions could move from an alternative option to a standard first-line recommendation, particularly for patients in underserved areas.

Study Details

Study typeRct
Sample sizen = 90
EvidenceLevel 2
Follow-up84.8 mo
PublishedJan 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
INTRODUCTION: Rotator cuff syndrome (RCS) is a common musculoskeletal condition that requires rehabilitation. Telemedicine involving asynchronous exercise video and remote follow-up has emerged as a potential alternative to conventional in-person rehabilitation, offering advantages in accessibility and cost-effectiveness. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of telemedicine compared to conventional methods in the rehabilitation of RCS. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was conducted at a public hospital physiatry clinic between November 2023 and June 2024. The telemedicine group (TG) received asynchronous exercise videos and remote video-call follow-ups; the control group (CG) received illustrated exercise brochures and in-person follow-ups. Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 15th day, and 6th month. The primary outcomes were pain (measured using the Visual Analog Scale, VAS) and functional levels (assessed using the Quick Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, QuickDASH). Secondary outcomes included exercise adherence, satisfaction, and travel burden. Data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: Trial included 90 patients (mean age 51.19 ± 7.07 years), randomly assigned to TG (n = 45) or CG (n = 45). Both groups demonstrated within-group improvements in VAS (mean change -1.88 [95% CI -2.56 to -1.20]) and QuickDASH (-15.6 [95% CI -21.0 to -10.2]) scores from baseline to 15th day (p < 0.001) and in VAS from baseline to 6th month (-4.82 [95% CI -5.50 to -4.13], p < 0.001). No between-group differences were found in pain reduction at 15th day (estimate = -0.27, 95% CI -1.44 to 0.89, p = 0.645) or at 6th month (estimate = -0.40, 95% CI -1.57 to 0.77, p = 0.499), nor in functional improvement at 15th day (estimate = -2.68, 95% CI -12.90 to 7.57, p = 0.607). The TG demonstrated higher exercise adherence (p = 0.027) and satisfaction (p < 0.001). Based on predefined minimal clinically important difference thresholds, all group differences fell within non-inferiority margins. The cost-effectiveness of telemedicine was 266.4 km and 1325.6 minutes saved per unit of VAS, and 11.34 km and 56.41 minutes saved per unit of QuickDASH improvement. CONCLUSION: Telemedicine is a viable alternative to traditional management of RCS, providing comparable pain relief, functional outcomes, and reduced travel burden. Future studies should assess long-term effects and broader populations.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.