Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management demands innovative strategies that address its complex nature. Telerehabilitation and conventional rehabilitation, which utilize wearable devices, represent promising avenues in this regard. This narrative review synthesizes the current literature to comprehensively compare these modalities in terms of accessibility, monitoring mechanisms, patient adherence, cost-effectiveness, and social support. Telerehabilitation offers unparalleled convenience, real-time monitoring, and personalized feedback through wearables, thereby fostering greater patient engagement and adherence compared to conventional rehabilitation. However, conventional rehabilitation provides face-to-face interactions, immediate feedback, and a more personalized touch, albeit with logistical challenges and higher costs. This review emphasizes the significance of patient preferences, technological access, and healthcare infrastructure in selecting the appropriate approach. It also calls for further research into long-term outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and the optimal integration of wearable technology in diabetes management programs. Ultimately, both telerehabilitation and conventional rehabilitation demonstrate considerable potential in empowering individuals with T2DM, underlining the imperative for tailored and patient-centric interventions in diabetes care. The review also stresses the significance of integrating patient preferences and their level of comfort with technology when deciding on treatment approaches. It also takes into account the diverse socioeconomic contexts and healthcare infrastructures globally, which can affect the viability and efficacy of both telerehabilitation and conventional rehabilitation. Moreover, the integration of wearable technology in diabetes management programs holds promise for enhancing self-management capabilities and promoting healthier lifestyles. However, it is essential to tackle prospective discrepancies in access to these technologies and ensure fair distribution. Looking forward, ongoing research efforts should focus on justifying long-term outcomes, optimizing cost-effectiveness, and refining implementation strategies to maximize the benefits of both modalities.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management demands innovative strategies that address its complex nature. Telerehabilitation and conventional rehabilitation, which utilize wearable devices, represent promising avenues in this regard. This narrative review synthesizes the current literature to comprehensively compare these modalities in terms of accessibility, monitoring mechanisms, patient adherence, cost-effectiveness, and social support. Telerehabilitation offers unparalleled convenience, real-time monitoring, and personalized feedback through wearables, thereby fostering greater patient engagement and adherence compared to conventional rehabilitation. However, conventional rehabilitation provides face-to-face interactions, immediate feedback, and a more personalized touch, albeit with logistical challenges and higher costs. This review emphasizes the significance of patient preferences, technological access, and healthcare infrastructure in selecting the appropriate approach. It also calls for further research into long-term outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and the optimal integration of wearable technology in diabetes management programs. Ultimately, both telerehabilitation and conventional rehabilitation demonstrate considerable potential in empowering individuals with T2DM, underlining the imperative for tailored and patient-centric interventions in diabetes care. The review also stresses the significance of integrating patient preferences and their level of comfort with technology when deciding on treatment approaches. It also takes into account the diverse socioeconomic contexts and healthcare infrastructures globally, which can affect the viability and efficacy of both telerehabilitation and conventional rehabilitation. Moreover, the integration of wearable technology in diabetes management programs holds promise for enhancing self-management capabilities and promoting healthier lifestyles. However, it is essential to tackle prospective discrepancies in access to these technologies and ensure fair distribution. Looking forward, ongoing research efforts should focus on justifying long-term outcomes, optimizing cost-effectiveness, and refining implementation strategies to maximize the benefits of both modalities.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management demands innovative strategies that address its complex nature. Telerehabilitation and conventional rehabilitation, which utilize wearable devices, represent promising avenues in this regard. This narrative review synthesizes the current literature to comprehensively compare these modalities in terms of accessibility, monitoring mechanisms, patient adherence, cost-effectiveness, and social support. Telerehabilitation offers unparalleled convenience, real-time monitoring, and personalized feedback through wearables, thereby fostering greater patient engagement and adherence compared to conventional rehabilitation. However, conventional rehabilitation provides face-to-face interactions, immediate feedback, and a more personalized touch, albeit with logistical challenges and higher costs. This review emphasizes the significance of patient preferences, technological access, and healthcare infrastructure in selecting the appropriate approach. It also calls for further research into long-term outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and the optimal integration of wearable technology in diabetes management programs. Ultimately, both telerehabilitation and conventional rehabilitation demonstrate considerable potential in empowering individuals with T2DM, underlining the imperative for tailored and patient-centric interventions in diabetes care. The review also stresses the significance of integrating patient preferences and their level of comfort with technology when deciding on treatment approaches. It also takes into account the diverse socioeconomic contexts and healthcare infrastructures globally, which can affect the viability and efficacy of both telerehabilitation and conventional rehabilitation. Moreover, the integration of wearable technology in diabetes management programs holds promise for enhancing self-management capabilities and promoting healthier lifestyles. However, it is essential to tackle prospective discrepancies in access to these technologies and ensure fair distribution. Looking forward, ongoing research efforts should focus on justifying long-term outcomes, optimizing cost-effectiveness, and refining implementation strategies to maximize the benefits of both modalities.