Key result
Hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation provided similar effects on readmission rates (OR 0.90) and mortality compared to usual rehabilitation care in patients with cardiovascular disease.
Why the study?
Hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation (HCTR) can minimize infection risks by reducing hospital visits, but its efficacy and safety as secondary prevention compared with usual rehabilitation care required assessment.
Does hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation reduce mortality and readmission in patients with cardiovascular disease?
Meta-Analysis (n=1,578)
Does hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation reduce mortality and readmission in patients with cardiovascular disease?
Odds Ratio: 0.9 (95% CI 0.69–1.17)
p-value: p=0.43
HCTR is a safe and effective alternative to traditional cardiac rehabilitation, offering similar clinical outcomes while significantly improving cardiorespiratory fitness and functional capacity.
Supports hybrid telerehabilitation as a safe alternative without raising readmission or mortality risk; extends RCT evidence for its use in cardiovascular disease.
Backgrounds. Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a serious condition that poses threats to patients’ quality of life and life expectancy. Cardiac rehabilitation is a crucial treatment option that can improve outcomes for CVD patients. Hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation (HCTR) is a relatively new approach. In the context of pandemics, HCTR can minimize the risk of cluster infections by reducing hospital visits while delivering effective rehabilitation care. This study is aimed at assessing the efficacy and safety of HCTR as a secondary prevention measure for CVD patients compared to usual rehabilitation care. Methods. We searched PubMed, Embase, The Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and PsychINFO for all related studies up to January 20, 2023. Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts of potentially eligible articles based on the predefined search criteria. Data were analyzed using a comprehensive meta-analysis software (RevMan5.3). Results. Eight trials, involving 1578 participants, were included. HCTR and usual rehabilitation care provide similar effects on readmission rates (odds ratio <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"> <a:mfenced open="(" close=")"> <a:mrow> <a:mtext>OR</a:mtext> </a:mrow> </a:mfenced> <a:mo>=</a:mo> <a:mn>0.90</a:mn> </a:math> (95% CI 0.69-1.17), <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"> <e:mi>P</e:mi> <e:mo>=</e:mo> <e:mn>0.43</e:mn> </e:math> ) and mortality (odds ratio <g:math xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"> <g:mfenced open="(" close=")"> <g:mrow> <g:mtext>OR</g:mtext> </g:mrow> </g:mfenced> <g:mo>=</g:mo> <g:mn>1.06</g:mn> </g:math> (95% CI 0.72-1.57), <k:math xmlns:k="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M4"> <k:mi>P</k:mi> <k:mo>=</k:mo> <k:mn>0.76</k:mn> </k:math> ). Effects on Short Form-36 Health Status Questionnaire (SF-36) score were also similar (SMD: 1.32 (95% CI-0.48-3.11), <m:math xmlns:m="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M5"> <m:mi>P</m:mi> <m:mo>=</m:mo> <m:mn>0.15</m:mn> </m:math> ). Compared with usual rehabilitation care, HCTR can improve peak oxygen uptake (VO2 peak) (SMD: 0.99 (95% CI 0.23-1.74), <o:math xmlns:o="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M6"> <o:mi>P</o:mi> <o:mo>=</o:mo> <o:mn>0.01</o:mn> </o:math> ) and 6-minute walking test (6MWT) (SMD: 10.02 (95% CI 5.44-14.60), <q:math xmlns:q="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M7"> <q:mi>P</q:mi> <q:mo><</q:mo> <q:mn>0.001</q:mn> </q:math> ) of patients. Conclusions. Our findings indicate that HCTR is as effective as traditional rehabilitation care in reducing readmission rates and mortality and improving quality of life in patients with CVD. However, HCTR offers the added advantage of improving VO2 peak and 6MWT, measurements of cardiorespiratory fitness and functional capacity, respectively. These results suggest that HCTR can be a safe and effective alternative to traditional rehabilitation care, offering numerous benefits for CVD patients. Clinical Study Registration Number. This trial is registered with NCT02523560 and NCT02796404.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yang et al. (2023) conducted a meta-analysis in Cardiovascular disease (CVD) (n=1,578). Hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation (HCTR) vs. Usual rehabilitation care was evaluated on Readmission rates (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.69-1.17, p=0.43). Hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation provided similar effects on readmission rates (OR 0.90) and mortality compared to usual rehabilitation care in patients with cardiovascular disease.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: