Augmented reality based sensory interaction device improved LVEF to 54.11% vs 51.85%, cardiac index to 2.56 vs 2.34 Lmin B9m B2, 6-minute walk distance to 392.14 m vs 367.89 m, and self-efficacy scores to 25.14 vs 23.82 compared to conventional rehabilitation in CHF patients after 4 weeks.
Cohort (n=200)
No
Does augmented reality-based somatosensory interactive training improve cardiac function, exercise capacity, and quality of life in patients with chronic heart failure?
Augmented reality-based rehabilitation training significantly improves cardiac function, exercise capacity, and patient satisfaction in chronic heart failure patients compared to conventional rehabilitation.
Effect estimate: P < 0.001 for LVEF, P < 0.001 for CI, P < 0.001 for 6MWD, P = 0.009 for GSES
Absolute Event Rate: 54.11% vs 51.85%
p-value: p=<0.05 for all reported parameters
Chronic heart failure (CHF) significantly impacts patient quality of life and presents challenges in healthcare. Innovative rehabilitation strategies, such as augmented reality (AR) technology, offer potential benefits for improving outcomes. This study aims to investigate the effectiveness of an AR-based sensory interaction device in terms of cardiac function, exercise capacity, quality of life, and patient satisfaction in CHF rehabilitation. A retrospective cohort study enrolled 200 patients with CHF between January 2021 and January 2023. Participants were assigned into a conventional rehabilitation group (n = 86) and an intervention group (n = 114) receiving AR-based somatosensory interactive training. Key measures included general characteristics, complete blood count, cardiac function indicators, 6-minute walking distance (6MWD) and maximum activity time (Tmax), General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES), Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) scores, and satisfaction questionnaires of nursing care quality and comfort level. The general characteristics, routine blood counts, and cardiac function indicators were comparable prior to the intervention. Post-intervention analysis revealed significant improvements in the intervention group across several parameters, including left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF: 54.11% vs. 51.85%, P < 0.001) and cardiac index (CI: 2.56 vs. 2.34 L·min⁻¹·m⁻², P < 0.001). Exercise capacity, indicated by 6-minute walking distance (6MWD: 392.14 m vs. 367.89 m, P < 0.001), and GSES scores also improved significantly (25.14 vs. 23.82, P = 0.009). Satisfaction with rehabilitation was higher in the intervention group (70.18% vs. 54.65%, P = 0.024), while MLHFQ scores decreased more substantially, indicating enhanced quality of life. The correlation analysis revealed that AR-based device effectiveness was positively associated with cardiac functionality, exercise capacity, self-efficacy, and patient satisfaction. AR-based rehabilitation offers significant advantages over usual care in improving cardiac function, exercise capacity, quality of life, and patient satisfaction in CHF patients. These findings, while encouraging, should be interpreted with caution given the retrospective, single-centre design and four-week follow-up.
Zhang et al. (Wed,) conducted a cohort in Chronic Heart Failure (n=200). Augmented reality based sensory interaction device with somatosensory interactive training vs. Conventional rehabilitation training was evaluated on Cardiac function (LVEF, CI), exercise capacity (6MWD), self-efficacy (GSES), quality of life (MLHFQ scores), and patient satisfaction (P < 0.001 for LVEF, P < 0.001 for CI, P < 0.001 for 6MWD, P = 0.009 for GSES, p=<0.05 for all reported parameters). Augmented reality based sensory interaction device improved LVEF to 54.11% vs 51.85%, cardiac index to 2.56 vs 2.34 Lmin B9m B2, 6-minute walk distance to 392.14 m vs 367.89 m, and self-efficacy scores to 25.14 vs 23.82 compared to conventional rehabilitation in CHF patients after 4 weeks.