Christen Chan1, Cristiane Yamabayashi2, Nafeez Syed3, Ashley Kirkham1, Pat G Camp4. 1. Centre for Heart Lung Innovation, University of British Columbia. 2. Centre for Heart Lung Innovation, University of British Columbia; Alberta Health Services - Rockyview General Hospital, Calgary. 3. Centre for Heart Lung Innovation, University of British Columbia; School of Allied Health Sciences, Manipal University, Manipal, India. 4. Centre for Heart Lung Innovation, University of British Columbia; Department of Physical Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver.
Abstract
Background: Despite exercise capacity and quality-of-life benefits, pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) and cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes are not easily accessed because of several barriers. A solution may be telerehabilitation (TR), in which patients exercise in their communities while they are monitored via teletechnology. However, the benefits of TR for the purposes of PR and CR have not been systematically reviewed. Objective: To determine whether the benefits of the exercise component of PR and CR using TR are comparable to usual-care (UC) programmes. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed of the Medline, Embase, and CINAHL databases up to July 13, 2015. Meta-analyses were performed for peak oxygen consumption, peak workload, exercise test duration, and 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance using the I2 statistic and forest plots displaying standardized mean difference (SMD). Results: Of 1,431 citations found, 8 CR studies met the inclusion criteria. No differences were found in exercise outcomes between UC and TR groups for CR studies, except in exercise test duration, which slightly favoured UC (SMD 0.268, 95% CI: 0.002, 0.534, p<0.05). Only 1 PR study was included, and it showed similar improvements on the 6MWT between the UC and TR groups. Conclusion: TR for patients with cardiac conditions provided benefits similar to UC with no adverse effects reported. Similar studies of TR for patients with pulmonary conditions need to be conducted.
Background: Despite exercise capacity and quality-of-life benefits, pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) and cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes are not easily accessed because of several barriers. A solution may be telerehabilitation (TR), in which patients exercise in their communities while they are monitored via teletechnology. However, the benefits of TR for the purposes of PR and CR have not been systematically reviewed. Objective: To determine whether the benefits of the exercise component of PR and CR using TR are comparable to usual-care (UC) programmes. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed of the Medline, Embase, and CINAHL databases up to July 13, 2015. Meta-analyses were performed for peak oxygen consumption, peak workload, exercise test duration, and 6-minute walk test (6MWT) distance using the I2 statistic and forest plots displaying standardized mean difference (SMD). Results: Of 1,431 citations found, 8 CR studies met the inclusion criteria. No differences were found in exercise outcomes between UC and TR groups for CR studies, except in exercise test duration, which slightly favoured UC (SMD 0.268, 95% CI: 0.002, 0.534, p<0.05). Only 1 PR study was included, and it showed similar improvements on the 6MWT between the UC and TR groups. Conclusion: TR for patients with cardiac conditions provided benefits similar to UC with no adverse effects reported. Similar studies of TR for patients with pulmonary conditions need to be conducted.
Authors: Iwona Korzeniowska-Kubacka; Barbara Dobraszkiewicz-Wasilewska; Maria Bilińska; Ewa Rydzewska; Ryszard Piotrowicz Journal: Kardiol Pol Date: 2011 Impact factor: 3.108
Authors: Martijn A Spruit; Sally J Singh; Chris Garvey; Richard ZuWallack; Linda Nici; Carolyn Rochester; Kylie Hill; Anne E Holland; Suzanne C Lareau; William D-C Man; Fabio Pitta; Louise Sewell; Jonathan Raskin; Jean Bourbeau; Rebecca Crouch; Frits M E Franssen; Richard Casaburi; Jan H Vercoulen; Ioannis Vogiatzis; Rik Gosselink; Enrico M Clini; Tanja W Effing; François Maltais; Job van der Palen; Thierry Troosters; Daisy J A Janssen; Eileen Collins; Judith Garcia-Aymerich; Dina Brooks; Bonnie F Fahy; Milo A Puhan; Martine Hoogendoorn; Rachel Garrod; Annemie M W J Schols; Brian Carlin; Roberto Benzo; Paula Meek; Mike Morgan; Maureen P M H Rutten-van Mölken; Andrew L Ries; Barry Make; Roger S Goldstein; Claire A Dowson; Jan L Brozek; Claudio F Donner; Emiel F M Wouters Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2013-10-15 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Narelle S Cox; Simone Dal Corso; Henrik Hansen; Christine F McDonald; Catherine J Hill; Paolo Zanaboni; Jennifer A Alison; Paul O'Halloran; Heather Macdonald; Anne E Holland Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2021-01-29
Authors: Abayomi Salawu; Angela Green; Michael G Crooks; Nina Brixey; Denise H Ross; Manoj Sivan Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-07-07 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Ladislav Batalik; Filip Dosbaba; Martin Hartman; Katerina Batalikova; Jindrich Spinar Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) Date: 2020-03 Impact factor: 1.817