There is evidence in the literature of 47 interventions used by various rehabilitation professionals in the acute rehabilitation of neuro-oncological patients. However, most of these interventions are evidence level II and III. Four interventions (virtual reality, mirror therapy, robotic upper extremity training to improve function, and cognitive group therapy) are not included in the ICHI. The problems analysed in the literature that are targeted by interventions often do not coincide with the purpose of the specific intervention or are too broadly defined and not specific. These findings emphasize the need for greater precision in describing and documenting interventions, as well as the importance of aligning interventions more closely with ICF categories, particularly in the domains of Activities and Participation. This work highlights the heterogeneity in the reporting of rehabilitation interventions, and the challenges in mapping them to standardized classifications, emphasizing the ongoing need for refining and updating these classification systems.
Keyphrases
- physical activity
- end stage renal disease
- ejection fraction
- systematic review
- newly diagnosed
- machine learning
- randomized controlled trial
- healthcare
- chronic kidney disease
- virtual reality
- public health
- deep learning
- high resolution
- emergency department
- stem cells
- rectal cancer
- prostate cancer
- single cell
- mass spectrometry
- patient reported outcomes
- risk assessment
- robot assisted
- patient reported