Key result
New protocol tests if 6-week telehealth cardiac rehabilitation is non-inferior to supervised rehabilitation for fitness.
Why the study?
Enrolment and adherence to cardiac rehabilitation are low in rural locations, and concerns persist regarding compliance to exercise prescription with home-based telehealth programmes.
Does telehealth delivered ExCRP improve cardiorespiratory fitness non-inferiorly to supervised ExCRP in patients with cardiovascular disease?
RCT (n=50)
single-blinded
parallel (1:1)
Yes
Does telehealth delivered ExCRP improve cardiorespiratory fitness non-inferiorly to supervised ExCRP in patients with cardiovascular disease?
This protocol outlines a non-inferiority trial to determine if telehealth-delivered cardiac rehabilitation is as effective as supervised programs for improving cardiovascular function in rural patients.
INTRODUCTION: Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes (ExCRP) promote recovery and secondary prevention for individuals with cardiovascular disease (CVD). Despite this, enrolment and adherence to ExCRP in rural locations is low. Telehealth programmes provide a convenient, home-based intervention, but concerns remain about compliance to exercise prescription. This paper presents the rationale and protocol design to determine if telehealth delivered ExCRP is not inferior to supervised ExCRP for improving cardiovascular function and exercise fidelity. METHOD AND ANALYSIS: A non-inferiority, parallel (1:1), single-blinded randomised clinical trial will be conducted. Fifty patients with CVD will be recruited from a rural phase II ExCRP. Participants will be randomly assigned to telehealth or supervised ExCRP and prescribed three weekly exercise sessions for 6 weeks. Exercise sessions will include a 10 min warm up, up to 30 min of continuous aerobic exercise at a workload equivalent to the ventilatory anaerobic threshold and a 10 min cool down. The primary outcome will be change in cardiorespiratory fitness as measured by cardiopulmonary exercise test. Secondary outcome measures will include change in blood lipid profile, heart rate variability, pulse wave velocity, actigraphy measured sleep quality and training fidelity. Non-inferiority will be confirmed if intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses conclude the same outcome following independent samples t-test with p<0.025. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Research ethics committees at La Trobe University, St John of God Health Care and Bendigo Health approved the study protocol and informed consent. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated among stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12622000872730p; pre-results.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Collins et al. (2023) conducted an RCT in cardiovascular disease (CVD) (n=50). Telehealth exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation programme vs. Supervised exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation programme was evaluated on Change in cardiorespiratory fitness as measured by cardiopulmonary exercise test. This protocol describes a randomized clinical trial of 50 patients to determine if a 6-week telehealth cardiac rehabilitation program is non-inferior to supervised rehabilitation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: