Why the study?
Hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation might improve both physical capacity and depressive symptoms, but its influence in heart failure patients compared with usual care required investigation.
Does hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation improve depressive symptoms and physical capacity in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction?
Does hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation improve depressive symptoms and physical capacity in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction?
A 9-week hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation program significantly improved physical capacity but did not reduce depressive symptoms compared to usual care in patients with HFrEF.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
HCTR improves physical capacity similarly to UC for depressive symptoms in HF; extends telerehabilitation evidence while leaving psychological benefits open.
AIMS: The hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation (HCTR) consisting of telecare (with psychological telesupport), telerehabilitation, and remote monitoring of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices might be an option to improve both physical capacity and depressive symptoms. The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of HCTR on depressive symptoms and physical capacity in heart failure (HF) patients in comparison with usual care (UC). METHODS AND RESULTS: The present analysis formed part of a multicentre, randomized trial that enrolled 850 HF patients (New York Heart Association I-III, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%). Patients were randomized 1:1 to HCTR or UC. Patients underwent an HCTR programme (1 week in hospital and 8 weeks at home; exercise training 5 times weekly) or UC with observation. The Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II) score (cut point for depression ≥ 14) was used to assess depression and the physical capacity was measured by peak oxygen consumption (peak VO2; mL/kg/min). Measurements were made before and after 9-week intervention/observation (HCTR/UC group). Both groups were comparable in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics. In HCTR group, at entry, 23% of the sample obtained BDI-II scores ≥14 vs. 27.5% in UC group. There were no significant differences between groups regarding ΔBDI-II score (P = 0.992) after 9-week HCTR/UC. There was a significant improvement in physical capacity only in the HCTR group in both patients with (P = 0.033) and without (P < 0.001) depression. CONCLUSIONS: In HF patients, HCTR provided similar reduction of depressive symptoms as UC. HCTR resulted in a significant improvement in physical capacity in patients with and without depression.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Piotrowicz et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: