This scoping review was structured according to the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines [22] (see Checklist 1). The review was conducted by 2 independent reviewers (LR and BB) using the following 4 leading databases: Pubmed-Ovid Medline, Science Direct, Scopus, and CINAHL, which are among the main databases in health and physical activity field. These 4 databases cover the different dimensions of our topic, namely biomedical, paramedical, and interdisciplinary. The following keywords were identified and combined to address the research questions: (1) The target population was older adults living in the community. The population studied in the articles did not have to present any specific health characteristic (osteoarthritis, postfall, motor, or cognitive disorders), (2) videoconference should have been used as support of intervention, (3) program of PE as a type of intervention, and (4) usability as the main purpose. Synonyms were used to maximize inclusion. Keywords and related subject headings were searched using Boolean operators. The selected studies were limited to those published between January 2000 and February 2025. No language restrictions were applied to the selected studies. The MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms and combinations used are listed in Table 1.

The selection of studies was conducted based on prespecified PICOS (Participants, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study design) criteria [23] (see Textbox 1):

Non–peer-reviewed conference and journal publications, review articles, and publications that took place in hospitals, rehabilitation centers, or care settings were excluded.

The search strategy yielded 3139 records, from which 2506 abstracts were selected after eliminating duplicates. After title and abstract selection, 156 articles were retained for full-text screening. After reading each publication, 1 article was found and added after reading an included article, and 143 publications were excluded. Figure 1 shows the reasons for article exclusion. Finally, 14 full-text publications were included (see Figure 1).

The main characteristics of the studies are summarized in Table 2. The studies were published in English and came from various countries: England [25], the United States [26-32], Brazil [33], Canada [34,35], Singapore [36], Japan [37], and Israel [38].

Some people were afraid to have the technology installed in their homes, finding it too intrusive. Gell et al [30] reported that participants were not anxious about using the technology (mean score 3.5, SD 4; out of 10). According to Hawley-Hague et al [25], the initial concerns of the older adults were about installing the equipment and using it (sometimes large screens in small spaces). Nevertheless, most of the participants managed to use the technology without major difficulties. Where difficulties arose, the use of the technology was facilitated by the existence of associated services [25,27].

However, as reported in many other studies, people were satisfied with the overall intervention, the proposed program and the technology [25-27,29,31,32,34-38]. They were willing to continue the interventions by videoconference if possible [29,31,38].

Hawley-Hague et al [25] reported that for health professionals, a display issue emerged: difficulty in seeing contrasts when the older person was dressed in black or if the room light was low. This was exacerbated in group sessions as the individual image was smaller. While these difficulties were not a concern for the patients who felt safe performing the exercises, they raised increased safety concerns according to the professionals [25]. However, no adverse events were reported by different authors [30,33,35]. Jennings et al [26] also reported that 95% of participants had reported feeling safe during exercise sessions.

Various advantages of videoconferencing technologies were noted, enhancing user satisfaction. These technologies made it possible to limit external risks such as frozen roads [27] and were more interesting than telephone follow-up, particularly during the follow-up phase [25]. The group sessions enabled by technology provided considerable added value through possible interaction between participants and the instructor. Schwartz et al [38] reported that for one person, the group activity allowed by videoconferencing helped alleviate feelings of loneliness and created a positive atmosphere. The instructor’s remote presence via videoconferencing and professionalism were appreciated and reassuring [31,34,38]. A total of 3 studies reported that the technology delivered an intervention in which participants perceived benefits on physical and mental well-being [34,36,38].

The use of videoconferencing allows professionals to offer PE interventions to older adults. Nevertheless, it seemed important to evaluate the usability of the technological support used to propose these interventions while encouraging the adherence of the older adults. To our knowledge, this is the first scoping review to evaluate the usability of various technological supports (ie, laptop, tablet, smartphone, or telepresence robot) for delivering tele-exercise programs to older adults via videoconferencing. Our results indicate that the usability of tele-exercise programs may vary according to the technological support used for their delivery via videoconferencing.

All the studies included in this review demonstrated the effectiveness of technological videoconferencing media in the implementation of live and remote PE interventions. Adherence rates were variable, ranging from 57% to 100%, and were sometimes higher than adherence rates for exercise programs offered without videoconferencing [39]. The high adherence of participants in the studies testifies to the effectiveness of the technologies used. It appears possible for participants to join the interventions conducted remotely. These technologies (ie, laptop, tablet, smartphone, or telepresence robot) offer great accessibility for remote communication, thus facilitating exchanges without the need for physical presence. This accessibility is likely a key factor in the high adherence rates observed, allowing participants to engage in PE interventions from the comfort of their own home, while overcoming geographical and logistical barriers.

While videoconferencing is effective in providing a live remote PE intervention, our results indicate various points of caution. First, variations in participants’ adherence to the program could be influenced by user characteristics. It may be more difficult to use technology for adults inexperienced with technology [35]. The results of this scoping review showed that older adults may need external assistance to use the technology [25,27,30,36]. Some factors hold back the use of technology by older adult users, namely the cost of the technology, followed by the complexity to use it [40,41]. This may justify the importance for obtaining environmental supports, that is, financial support and training opportunities, as it appears essential to help older users to overcome technological barriers (ie, connection issues, audio issues) [42]. Second, variations in technology effectiveness could be influenced by device characteristics and user satisfaction with the technology. According to our results, clinicians and older adults may encounter reliability issues with the technology that compromised the intervention and thus hindered users’ satisfaction and safety of older adults [27,32]. Some platforms appear to be less usable than others for large group interventions (ie, Zoom platform on smartphone) [25,26]. For videoconferencing systems, the required bandwidth, the security of the transmitted images and the reliability of technology are important factors to consider [43]. In the event of difficulties with technology, some solutions exist, for example, Granet et al [35], who suggested that recorded sessions may be appropriate for participants who are temporarily unable to attend live, online group sessions.

Qualitative interviews, self-administered questionnaires, and observations were the preferred approaches for evaluating the efficiency of technological support and user satisfaction with the system and the proposed interventions. These self-reported methods provide valuable insights into users’ perceptions: when users report positive experiences with technology, they are more likely to adopt or continue using it [44]. Some studies have also based their measures on theories like constructivist grounded theory [32] or the Technology Acceptance Model [25]. However, while a study did use existing usability scales such as the System Usability Scale [45] or the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology [46], the lack of widespread use of these standardized tools makes it difficult to draw general conclusions. While qualitative methods are essential for providing specific details that quantitative measures sometimes cannot capture, both qualitative and quantitative approaches should be applied to the design or improvement of technologies. Albert and Tullis [44] emphasized the importance of using standardized tools to ensure measurement quality because these tools are valid, reliable, and available for comparison purposes.

We also noted that just 1 study had assessed all the usability attributes defined by the ISO [18]. Most studies assessed elements covering only part of the theoretical concept, with satisfaction and effectiveness being the most common attributes, while other important aspects such as ease of use or safety are left out. This observation is also shared by Sousa and Dunn Lopez [47]. The results of their review indicated that the questionnaires constructed and used to assess usability in studies only assessed part of the usability construct. However, it is possible that some effectiveness studies did not include the assessment of efficiency and satisfaction, as these data could be assessed earlier in the intervention design process.

Although the use of technology in health and exercise has gained widespread popularity in recent years, particularly with the rise of remote interventions, high-quality studies specifically evaluating the usability of these technologies remain limited. This gap raises concerns about the reliability and generalizability of the information currently available and highlights the need for rigorous scientific research focused on usability aspects.

As our review suggests, a reason for the limited number of studies included is that usability testing is often overlooked or insufficiently addressed in research involving older adults. This observation is consistent with the findings of Meiland et al [48], who reported that usability issues related to technologies designed for people with dementia are rarely studied. More broadly, the field of usability testing for remote interventions in aging populations appears to be still emerging, with its relevance becoming more visible during events such as the COVID-19 pandemic [20].

To reflect the current state of the literature, we included pilot studies, which are particularly useful in areas where large-scale evaluations are still lacking. These studies often serve as precursors to broader investigations and provide valuable insights into the feasibility and usability of technological interventions. Pilot studies can assess (1) participant recruitment processes, (2) the reliability and adaptability of technological tools, and (3) potential adverse events—whether related to the technology, the exercise intervention, or user safety [49,50].

In this sense, even preliminary data contributes meaningfully to understanding usability and helps inform the development of future interventions.

The findings of this review highlight the potential of videoconferencing technologies to support access and continuity of remote physical exercise programs for older adults in home-based settings. This approach is especially useful for individuals who have difficulty traveling, such as those with mobility limitations or who live in remote areas. Beyond healthy older adults, it would be relevant to assess the usability of these technologies in rehabilitation settings, where individuals with troubles often have specific needs. Future studies could explore how cognitive, sensory, or motor impairments may affect interaction with digital tools, and how these technologies may need to be adjusted in terms of usability and support.

To provide a more complete understanding of usability, future research could combine qualitative and quantitative approaches, using mixed methods and standardized tools. This would allow for more consistent and comparable results, reflecting both user and professional perspectives. As remote interventions become more common—especially following the acceleration brought by the COVID-19 pandemic—it is important to continue research on how these technologies are integrated into care practices, making sure they remain acceptable, effective, and safe for all types of users.

The results of this exploratory study highlight the ease of use of videoconferencing support technologies to deliver remote exercise programs, highlighting positive aspects such as usability, user satisfaction, efficiency, and effectiveness. However, our findings also highlight the importance of environmental support, such as financial assistance and training opportunities, which are essential in helping older people to use information and communication technologies. In the future, it is imperative to conduct research, using standardized tools, to enhance the usability of technologies tailored to the specific needs and characteristics of older adults, thereby ensuring the clinical effectiveness of these interventions.