Key result
Cardiac telerehabilitation matches centre-based programs for improving exercise capacity and quality of life.
Why the study?
Cardiac rehabilitation remains under-utilised despite its benefits, prompting a shift accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic toward alternative delivery models including telerehabilitation.
Does cardiac telerehabilitation improve or maintain outcomes compared to centre-based programs in individuals with heart failure or cardiovascular disease?
Does cardiac telerehabilitation improve or maintain outcomes compared to centre-based programs in individuals with heart failure or cardiovascular disease?
Cardiac telerehabilitation is a feasible and effective alternative to centre-based programs, offering comparable clinical outcomes while addressing barriers to access.
Given the under-utilisation of cardiac rehabilitation despite its benefits, there has been a shift towards alternative delivery models. The recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has accelerated this shift, leading to a growing interest in home-based cardiac rehabilitation including telerehabilitation. There is increasing evidence to support cardiac telerehabilitation, with studies generally demonstrating comparable outcomes and potential cost-benefits. This review aims to provide a synopsis of the current evidence on home-based cardiac rehabilitation with a focus on telerehabilitation and practical considerations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hwang et al. (2023) conducted a review in Heart failure and cardiovascular disease. Cardiac telerehabilitation vs. Centre-based cardiac rehabilitation was evaluated. Cardiac telerehabilitation is a feasible and effective alternative to centre-based programs, demonstrating comparable improvements in functional exercise capacity and quality of life.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: