Key result
10-month cardiac telerehabilitation increases physical activity by ~171% vs an 8-week center-based program.
Why the study?
Center-based cardiac rehabilitation improves health outcomes but has limitations, prompting the design and validation of a telerehabilitation system to overcome these barriers.
Does a 10-month cardiac telerehabilitation program improve physical activity compared to an 8-week center-based cardiac rehabilitation program in low-risk acute coronary syndrome patients?
Population
67 low-risk acute coronary syndrome patients
Comparison
10-month cardiac telerehabilitation vs 8-week center-based cardiac rehabilitation
Design
Randomized controlled trial with blinded data collectors
Follow-up
10 months
Authors
Loading...
Supports extended telerehabilitation over standard center-based programs for activity gains in low-risk ACS; extends RCT evidence to longer durations.
RCT (n=67)
Single-blind
1:1
Does a 10-month cardiac telerehabilitation program improve physical activity compared to an 8-week center-based cardiac rehabilitation program in low-risk acute coronary syndrome patients?
Absolute Event Rate: 1726% vs 636%
p-value: p=0.045
A 10-month cardiac telerehabilitation program significantly improved physical activity, VO2max, and quality of life compared to standard 8-week center-based rehabilitation in low-risk ACS patients.
Dalli et al. (2021) conducted an RCT in Low-risk acute coronary syndrome (n=67). Cardiac telerehabilitation (CTR) program vs. Center-based cardiac rehabilitation (CBCR) program was evaluated on Increased physical activity according to the IPAQ survey (median increase in METS-min/week) (p=0.045). A 10-month cardiac telerehabilitation program significantly increased physical activity compared to an 8-week center-based program (median increase 1726 vs. 636 METS-min/week, p=0.045).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: