Technology for home-based cardiac rehabilitation was rapidly adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic, though 49.3% of programs were suspended and 48.8% of continuing programs excluded high-risk patients.
Cross-Sectional (n=330)
Yes
During the COVID-19 pandemic, nearly half of cardiac rehabilitation programs were suspended, and those that continued rapidly adopted technology (mostly telephone) but often excluded high-risk patients.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation services continued during the COVID-19 pandemic and how technology has been used to deliver home-based cardiac rehabilitation. DESIGN: A mixed methods survey including questions about exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation service provision, programme diversity, patient complexity, technology use, barriers to using technology, and safety. SETTING: International survey of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes. PARTICIPANTS: Healthcare professionals working in exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes worldwide. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The proportion of programmes that continued providing exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation and which technologies had been used to deliver home-based cardiac rehabilitation. RESULTS: Three hundred and thirty eligible responses were received; 89.7% were from the UK. Approximately half (49.3%) of respondents reported that cardiac rehabilitation programmes were suspended due to COVID-19. Of programmes that continued, 25.8% used technology before the COVID-19 pandemic. Programmes typically started using technology within 19 days of COVID-19 becoming a pandemic. 48.8% did not provide cardiac rehabilitation to high-risk patients, telephone was most commonly used to deliver cardiac rehabilitation, and some centres used sophisticated technology such as teleconferencing. CONCLUSIONS: The rapid adoption of technology into standard practice is promising and may improve access to, and participation in, exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation beyond COVID-19. However, the exclusion of certain patient groups and programme suspension could worsen clinical symptoms and well-being, and increase hospital admissions. Refinement of current practices, with a focus on improving inclusivity and addressing safety concerns around exercise support to high-risk patients, may be needed.
O’Doherty et al. (Thu,) conducted a cross-sectional in Cardiac rehabilitation (n=330). Technology for home-based cardiac rehabilitation was evaluated on Proportion of programmes that continued providing exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation and technologies used. Technology for home-based cardiac rehabilitation was rapidly adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic, though 49.3% of programs were suspended and 48.8% of continuing programs excluded high-risk patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: