Pilot study demonstrates improved lung function in young adults post-COVID-19 through a telemedicine exercise program, indicating potential for rehabilitation.
Background: COVID-19 can have adverse effects on individuals’ lung functions for up to 6 months or more after the episode. As a result, people may be reluctant to exercise, and this can have further adverse effects on their lung capacity and fitness. This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of a telemedicine program designed to increase the exercise participation of young adults after COVID-19 and evaluate the changes in lung function after exercise training. Methods: The quasi-experimental pre–post study recruited sixty university students who had suffered from COVID-19 within the past 12 months. Four pulmonary outcomes were compared: forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), and the ratio of FEV1 to FVC. The telemedicine exercise (TE) group (n = 36) received an intervention to carry out regular stepping exercise (up to 10,000 steps) via online video instruction and frequent WhatsApp reminder messages. The control group (n = 24) only received an initial WhatsApp message to carry out regular stepping exercise, with no further follow-up. Results: The FVC, FEV1, and FEV1/FVC ratio revealed significant overall improvement both within groups and between groups (p < 0.001), with moderate effect sizes. PEFR showed a significant improvement within groups (p = 0.007) but not between groups (p = 0.533). The TE group recorded a significant increase in daily step count (from 7165 to 9733, p < 0.001) after 4 weeks of training. The control group showed a significant reduction in step count (from 6975 to 6442, p = 0.049). Conclusions: The results confirmed the beneficial effects of the telemedicine exercise program in contributing to increased exercise participation and improved lung functions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wong et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: