Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate the effects of individually prescribed hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation implemented at home on left ventricular diastolic function in heart failure patients.
Does hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation improve left ventricular diastolic function in patients with HFrEF and sinus rhythm?
Does hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation improve left ventricular diastolic function in patients with HFrEF and sinus rhythm?
A 9-week hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation program did not significantly improve echocardiographic measures of diastolic function in patients with HFrEF and sinus rhythm.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
HCTR does not improve diastolic function in HFrEF; challenges expectations of broad echocardiographic benefits from short-term telerehabilitation.
AIMS: The objective of the study was to evaluate the effects of individually prescribed hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation (HCTR) implemented at patients' homes on left ventricular (LV) diastolic function in heart failure (HF) patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Telerehabilitation in Heart Failure Patients trial (TELEREH-HF) is a multicenter, prospective, randomized (1:1), open-label, parallel-group, controlled trial involving HF patients assigned either to HCTR involving a remotely monitored home training program in conjunction with usual care (HCTR group) or usual care only (UC group). The patient in the HCTR group underwent a 9-week HCTR program consisting of two stages: an initial stage (1 week) conducted in hospital and the subsequent stage (eight weeks) of home-based HCTR five times weekly. Due to difficulties of proper assessment and differences in the evaluation of diastolic function in patients with atrial fibrillation, we included in our subanalysis only patients with sinus rhythm. Depending on the grade of diastolic dysfunction, patients were assigned to subgroups with mild diastolic (MDD) or severe diastolic dysfunction (SDD), both in HCTR (HCTR-MDD and HCTR-SDD) and UC groups (UC-MDD and UC-SDD). Changes from baseline to 9 weeks in echocardiographic parameters were seen only in A velocities in HCTR-MDD vs. UC-MDD; no significant shifts between groups of different diastolic dysfunction grades were observed after HCTR. All-cause mortality was higher in UC-SDD vs. UC-MDD with no difference between HCTR-SDD and HCTR-MDD. Higher probability of HF hospitalization was observed in HCTR-SDD than HCTR-MDD and in UC-SDD than UC-MDD. No differences in the probability of cardiovascular mortality and hospitalization were found. CONCLUSIONS: HCTR did not influence diastolic function in HF patients in a significant manner. The grade of diastolic dysfunction had an impact on mortality only in the UC group and HF hospitalization over a 12-24-month follow-up in HCTR and UC groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Irzmański et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: