Key result
Tele-rehabilitation improved functional capacity in the 6-Minute Walk Test (MD 15.86; 95% CI 7.23-24.49) and quality of life compared to usual care in heart failure patients.
Why the study?
Tele-rehabilitation may overcome accessibility barriers to centre-based cardiac rehabilitation in heart failure, but its clinical effectiveness compared to standard of care and standard rehabilitation needed systematic assessment.
Do tele-rehabilitation programs improve functional capacity, quality of life, and clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure compared to standard of care or centre-based rehabilitation?
Population
2206 chronic HF patients across 17 primary studies
Comparison
Tele-rehabilitation programs vs standard of care and standard centre-based cardiac rehabilitation
Design
Systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Authors
Loading...
Supports tele-rehabilitation adoption in heart failure care; confirms efficacy across 17 randomized trials.
Meta-Analysis (n=2,206)
Do tele-rehabilitation programs improve functional capacity, quality of life, and clinical outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure compared to standard of care or centre-based rehabilitation?
Mean Difference: 15.86 (95% CI 7.23–24.49)
Tele-rehabilitation effectively improves functional capacity and quality of life in heart failure patients, offering a safe alternative to traditional center-based rehabilitation.
Cavalheiro et al. (2021) conducted a meta-analysis in Heart failure (n=2,206). Tele-rehabilitation programs vs. Standard of care and standard rehabilitation was evaluated on Functional capacity in the 6 Minute Walk-Test (MD 15.86, 95% CI 7.23-24.49). Tele-rehabilitation improved functional capacity in the 6-Minute Walk Test (MD 15.86; 95% CI 7.23-24.49) and quality of life compared to usual care in heart failure patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: