Key result
Virtual cardiac rehab education is linked to personal, institutional, and environmental barriers and facilitators.
Why the study?
The study sought to explore perceived barriers and facilitators to participation among patients who did and did not attend virtual cardiac rehabilitation education sessions during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Cross-Sectional (n=106)
Yes
Virtual patient education in cardiac rehabilitation may be accessible and convenient, though participation is influenced by complex intrapersonal, interpersonal, institutional, and environmental factors.
Virtual cardiac rehab education involves multilevel barriers/facilitators; hypothesis-generating for implementation strategies before practice change.
PURPOSE: This study explored the perceived barriers and facilitators to participation in patients who did and did not attend virtual cardiac rehabilitation (CR) education sessions. METHODS: A mixed-methods approach was used. Virtual patient education was delivered during the coronavirus-19 pandemic. Phase 1 included a cross-sectional online survey completed by individuals who did and did not participate in these sessions. For phase 2, six virtual focus group sessions were conducted using the social-ecological framework to guide thematic analysis and interpretation of findings. RESULTS: Overall, 106 online surveys were completed; 60 (57%) attended Cardiac College Learn Online (CCLO) sessions only, one (1%) Women with Heart Online (WwHO) only, 21 (20%) attended both, and 24 (22%) did not attend virtual sessions. Half of the participants who attended virtual sessions viewed between one and four sessions. Most participants were from Canada (95%) and included the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute/Toronto Western Hospital centers (76%). Focus group findings revealed six overarching themes: Intrapersonal (mixed emotions/feelings; personal learning preferences); Interpersonal (desire for warmth of human contact and interaction); Institutional (the importance of external endorsement of sessions); and Environmental (technology; perceived facilitators and barriers). CONCLUSION: These findings highlight the unprecedented situation that patients and CR programs are facing during the pandemic. Virtual patient education may be more accessible, convenient, and responsive to the complex needs of these CR participants.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cotie et al. (2022) conducted a cross-sectional in Cardiac rehabilitation (n=106). Virtual cardiac rehabilitation education sessions vs. Non-attendance of virtual sessions was evaluated on Perceived barriers and facilitators to participation. Virtual cardiac rehabilitation education was associated with intrapersonal, interpersonal, institutional, and environmental barriers and facilitators among 106 surveyed participants.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: