Trial reportAtencion primaria2020
[Non-randomized trial to evaluate a continuous physiotherapy program versus interval in overweight patients suffering from acute coronary syndrome].
Trial report in Atencion primaria, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present a non-randomised trial to evaluate a continuous physiotherapy program versus a periodic one in overweight patients suffering from acute coronary syndrome.
aimTo detect differences between a continuous (CONT) physiotherapy program (PF) and a periodic (INT) physiotherapy program in overweight patients with acute coronary syndrome on anthropometric parameters, analytical parameters, heart rate, adherence, drop-outs, safety and tolerance.
designA multicentre, non-randomised two-armed quasi-experimental study with pre-post design. LOCATION: Community cardiac prevention centres (Manises, Valencia-LaFe, Játiva-Onteniente Health Department).
participantsThe study included a total of 339 overweight participants with acute coronary syndrome; living in the community; aged more than 18; no contraindication for physical exercise; no previous participation in a PF.
interventionsParticipants were assigned to a CONT training or an INT training (2 months). Each session was divided in warm-up, endurance, and cool-down. Endurance was performed at 12-13 Borg intensity and with heat rate calculated, with maximum heat rate obtained in the baseline ergometry. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Body mass index, waist circumference, lipid profile, blood glucose, glycosylated haemoglobin, resting heat rate, adherence, drop-outs, safety, and tolerance were assessed.
resultsThe CONT group showed significantly better differences in body mass index, waist circumference, total cholesterol, triglycerides, blood glucose, glycosylated haemoglobin and resting heat rate. No differences were observed in adherence, drop-outs, safety, and tolerance.
conclusionsThe CONT group obtained better results in all variables except for HDL cholesterol. Both programs offered a high adherence, safety, and tolerance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.