Key result
A virtual reality program added to conventional cardiac rehabilitation showed no statistically significant differences in functional or psychological outcomes compared to conventional treatment alone.
Why the study?
To determine the effects of a virtual reality program as a complementary tool to conventional phase II cardiac rehabilitation in patients with ischemic heart disease.
Does a virtual reality program added to conventional cardiac rehabilitation improve functional capacity and quality of life in patients with ischemic heart disease?
Population
Patients with ischemic heart disease in phase II cardiac rehabilitation
Comparison
Virtual reality-based aerobic exercise training plus conventional cardiac rehabilitation vs conventional treatment
Design
Single-blind randomized clinical trial
Authors
Loading...
VR adds no benefit to conventional CR; challenges routine adoption and leaves open refined protocol testing.
RCT
Single-blind
randomized
Does a virtual reality program added to conventional cardiac rehabilitation improve functional capacity and quality of life in patients with ischemic heart disease?
Adding a virtual reality-based video game program to conventional cardiac rehabilitation did not yield statistically significant between-group differences, despite within-group improvements.
García‐Bravo et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in Ischemic heart disease. Virtual reality (VR) program vs. Conventional cardiac rehabilitation program was evaluated on Ergometry, metabolic equivalents (METS), Functional Independence Measure, 6-min walk test (6MWT), SF-36, Beck Depression Inventory-II, satisfaction, and adherence. A virtual reality program added to conventional cardiac rehabilitation showed no statistically significant differences in functional or psychological outcomes compared to conventional treatment alone.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: