## 3 Results  
During the first month of treatment, the subjects in the tele-rehabilitation group received a median and IQR of 14.0 (3.5) sessions, of which 8.0 (2.0) were in the clinic and 5.0 (3.5) were via tele-rehabilitation. The self-practice time of the tele-rehabilitation group, recorded by the biofeedback system, was 4.7 (8.9) hours. The subjects in the control group received a median and IQR of 11.0 (3.5) sessions. Overall, for three months following the surgery, the tele-rehabilitation group received 22.6 (5.2) sessions, and the control group received 21.8 (6.2) sessions. Figure 2: The Meditouch hardware used in this study comprise (**a**) the ArmTutor device, used for exercising elbow flexion and extension, and (**b**) the 3-D device, placed and the wrist and used for exercising supination and pronation. Four subjects (two from each group) had subsequent surgeries (three of them due to limitation in ROM and one due to ulnar nerve entrapment) that occurred after the 3-month evaluation but before the 1-year evaluation. The specific timepoint in which the four subjects underwent additional surgery in relation to the first surgery was 8 and 11 months for the two subjects from the control group and 4.5 and 6 months for the two subjects from the tele-rehabilitation group. There were no between-group statistically significant differences in measures of passive and active ROM scores for each evaluation timepoint (normalized by the baseline measurement, according to Equation (1); Table S1). The BF01 range was between 1.658 and 2.233, indicating that the results are in favor of the Null hypothesis. However, the number of patients that attained functional ROM results, i.e., active ROM acceptable for Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), following 1 month of intervention was higher in the tele-rehabilitation group. Specifically, functional active flexion ROM (i.e., \(<\)130\({}^{\circ}\)[35]) was attained by 4 (44.4%) subjects in the tele-rehabilitation group and 1 (11.1%) subject in the control group. Functional active extension ROM (i.e., \(>\)30\({}^{\circ}\)[35]) was attained by 7 (77.8%) subjects in the tele-rehabilitation group and 4 (44.4%) subjects in the control group. Normal active supination ROM (i.e., \(>\)85\({}^{\circ}\)[35]) was attained by 7 (77.8%) subjects in the tele-rehabilitation group and 5 (55.6%) subjects in the control group. Normal active pronation ROM (i.e., \(>\)75\({}^{\circ}\)[35]) was attained by 8 (88.9%) subjects in the tele-rehabilitation group and 5 out of 7 (71.4%) in the control group (data are missing for 2 subjects). There were no between-group statistically significant differences for each evaluation timepoint (normalized by the baseline measurement according to Equation (1); Table S1) for the grip force (BP01 range: 1.057-2.472), PREE (BP01 range: 0.949-2.415), DASH (BF01 range: 1.314-1.957), and JJHT (BF01 range: 1.921-2.178) scores. However, 8 (88.9%) subjects from the tele-rehabilitation group improved their JJFT score by more than 10.2 points (which is Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) in the JJFT score, found for adults with upper extremity musculoskeletal complaints [36; 37]), but only 5 (55.6%) in the control group improved their JJFT score by more than 10.2 points. The PREE and DASH scores for each group in each time point are presented in Figure 3.  
Figure 3: The Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE) (left frame) and Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) (right frame) scores for each group at baseline (before the intervention) and at the 3 postintervention timepoints. The numbers above each box plot represent statistical significance between timepoints, as follows: 1 Statistically significant differences with the test performed at baseline. 2 Statistically significant differences with the test performed after 1 month. 3 Statistically significant differences with the test performed after 3 months. 4 Statistically significant differences with the test performed after 1 year.