Cargando…
Is the Training Intensity in Phase Two Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Different in Telehealth versus Outpatient Rehabilitation?
Telehealth cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a feasible and effective alternative to conventional outpatient CR. Present evidence is limited on the comparison of exercise intensity adherence in telehealth and outpatient CR. The purpose of the study was to evaluate and compare training intensity adheren...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8466823/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34575185 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10184069 |
_version_ | 1784573238374825984 |
---|---|
author | Batalik, Ladislav Pepera, Garyfallia Papathanasiou, Jannis Rutkowski, Sebastian Líška, David Batalikova, Katerina Hartman, Martin Felšőci, Marián Dosbaba, Filip |
author_facet | Batalik, Ladislav Pepera, Garyfallia Papathanasiou, Jannis Rutkowski, Sebastian Líška, David Batalikova, Katerina Hartman, Martin Felšőci, Marián Dosbaba, Filip |
author_sort | Batalik, Ladislav |
collection | PubMed |
description | Telehealth cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a feasible and effective alternative to conventional outpatient CR. Present evidence is limited on the comparison of exercise intensity adherence in telehealth and outpatient CR. The purpose of the study was to evaluate and compare training intensity adherence through 12-week phase II CR in telehealth and outpatient CR. A sample of 56 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) with a mean age of 56.7 ± 7.1 entering comprehensive secondary prevention phase II was randomized into telehealth CR (n = 28) and control outpatient CR (n = 28) groups. The primary outcome was a comparison of training intensity adherence in both CR models and heart rate (HR) response from individual CR sessions, expressed by the HR reserve percentage. As a result, the parameter HR reserve percentage as the total average of the training intensity during the telehealth intervention and the outpatient CR did not differ statistically (p = 0.63). There was no death case, and all severe adverse cases required medical admission throughout an exercise training session in study subjects in both groups. This research evidence demonstrated that the telehealth CR model is similar in training intensities to the conventional outpatient CR in CAD patients with low to moderate cardiovascular risk. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8466823 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84668232021-09-27 Is the Training Intensity in Phase Two Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Different in Telehealth versus Outpatient Rehabilitation? Batalik, Ladislav Pepera, Garyfallia Papathanasiou, Jannis Rutkowski, Sebastian Líška, David Batalikova, Katerina Hartman, Martin Felšőci, Marián Dosbaba, Filip J Clin Med Article Telehealth cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a feasible and effective alternative to conventional outpatient CR. Present evidence is limited on the comparison of exercise intensity adherence in telehealth and outpatient CR. The purpose of the study was to evaluate and compare training intensity adherence through 12-week phase II CR in telehealth and outpatient CR. A sample of 56 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) with a mean age of 56.7 ± 7.1 entering comprehensive secondary prevention phase II was randomized into telehealth CR (n = 28) and control outpatient CR (n = 28) groups. The primary outcome was a comparison of training intensity adherence in both CR models and heart rate (HR) response from individual CR sessions, expressed by the HR reserve percentage. As a result, the parameter HR reserve percentage as the total average of the training intensity during the telehealth intervention and the outpatient CR did not differ statistically (p = 0.63). There was no death case, and all severe adverse cases required medical admission throughout an exercise training session in study subjects in both groups. This research evidence demonstrated that the telehealth CR model is similar in training intensities to the conventional outpatient CR in CAD patients with low to moderate cardiovascular risk. MDPI 2021-09-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8466823/ /pubmed/34575185 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10184069 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Batalik, Ladislav Pepera, Garyfallia Papathanasiou, Jannis Rutkowski, Sebastian Líška, David Batalikova, Katerina Hartman, Martin Felšőci, Marián Dosbaba, Filip Is the Training Intensity in Phase Two Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Different in Telehealth versus Outpatient Rehabilitation? |
title | Is the Training Intensity in Phase Two Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Different in Telehealth versus Outpatient Rehabilitation? |
title_full | Is the Training Intensity in Phase Two Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Different in Telehealth versus Outpatient Rehabilitation? |
title_fullStr | Is the Training Intensity in Phase Two Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Different in Telehealth versus Outpatient Rehabilitation? |
title_full_unstemmed | Is the Training Intensity in Phase Two Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Different in Telehealth versus Outpatient Rehabilitation? |
title_short | Is the Training Intensity in Phase Two Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Different in Telehealth versus Outpatient Rehabilitation? |
title_sort | is the training intensity in phase two cardiovascular rehabilitation different in telehealth versus outpatient rehabilitation? |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8466823/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34575185 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10184069 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT batalikladislav isthetrainingintensityinphasetwocardiovascularrehabilitationdifferentintelehealthversusoutpatientrehabilitation AT peperagaryfallia isthetrainingintensityinphasetwocardiovascularrehabilitationdifferentintelehealthversusoutpatientrehabilitation AT papathanasioujannis isthetrainingintensityinphasetwocardiovascularrehabilitationdifferentintelehealthversusoutpatientrehabilitation AT rutkowskisebastian isthetrainingintensityinphasetwocardiovascularrehabilitationdifferentintelehealthversusoutpatientrehabilitation AT liskadavid isthetrainingintensityinphasetwocardiovascularrehabilitationdifferentintelehealthversusoutpatientrehabilitation AT batalikovakaterina isthetrainingintensityinphasetwocardiovascularrehabilitationdifferentintelehealthversusoutpatientrehabilitation AT hartmanmartin isthetrainingintensityinphasetwocardiovascularrehabilitationdifferentintelehealthversusoutpatientrehabilitation AT felsocimarian isthetrainingintensityinphasetwocardiovascularrehabilitationdifferentintelehealthversusoutpatientrehabilitation AT dosbabafilip isthetrainingintensityinphasetwocardiovascularrehabilitationdifferentintelehealthversusoutpatientrehabilitation |