Why the study?
Government stay-at-home directives during the COVID-19 pandemic restricted in-person cardiac rehabilitation, prompting the need to explore clinicians' experiences and identify barriers and enablers to delivering remote care.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
While clinicians are eager to retain technology-enabled cardiac rehabilitation delivery, significant challenges remain with adopters and organizations that need to be addressed for sustainable integration.
AIMS: Delivery of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) was challenged during the pandemic caused by the Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), due to government stay-at-home directives which restricted in-person programmes. The Australian state of Victoria experienced the longest and most severe COVID-19 restrictions and was in lockdown for ∼6 months of 2020. We aimed to explore (i) clinicians' experiences and perceptions and (ii) identify barriers and enablers, for delivering CR during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS AND RESULTS: Victorian members of the Australian Cardiovascular Health and Rehabilitation Association (ACRA) were invited to attend an exploratory qualitative online consultation in November 2020. An inductive thematic analysis was undertaken, before deductively applying the Non-adoption, Abandonment, Scale-up, Spread, and Sustainability (NASSS) framework to identify barriers and enablers for technology adoption in CR. Thirty members participated in a 106-min consultation. Seventeen members who provided demographics represented multiple disciplines (nursing n = 13, exercise physiology n = 3, and physiotherapy n = 1) and geographical settings (metropolitan n = 10, regional n = 4, and rural n = 3). Four main themes were inductively identified: consequences of change; use of technology; capacity; and the way forward. The deductive NASSS analysis demonstrated the main challenges of continuing remotely delivered CR lie with adopters (staff, patients, and carers) and with organizations. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 pandemic expedited significant changes to CR delivery models. While clinicians are eager to retain technology-enabled delivery in addition to resuming in-person CR, it is now timely to review remote models of care, tools used and plan how they will be integrated with traditional in-person programmes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cartledge et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: