Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33245286›Full record

SynthesisJMIR mHealth and uHealth2020

Implementation of Telerehabilitation Interventions for the Self-Management of Cardiovascular Disease: Systematic Review.

Narayan Subedi, Jonathan C Rawstorn, Lan Gao, Harriet Koorts, Ralph Maddison

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
8.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

73 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 128 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Narayan SubediSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-8752-2244
Jonathan C RawstornSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9755-7993
Lan GaoSchool of Health and Social Development, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9734-1140
Harriet KoortsSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1303-6064
Ralph MaddisonSchool of Exercise and Nutrition Sciences, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-8564-5518
Deakin University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCoronary heart disease (CHD) is a leading cause of disability and deaths worldwide. Secondary prevention, including cardiac rehabilitation (CR), is crucial to improve risk factors and to reduce disease burden and disability. Accessibility barriers contribute to underutilization of traditional center-based CR programs; therefore, alternative delivery models, including cardiac telerehabilitation (ie, delivery via mobile, smartphone, and/or web-based apps), have been tested. Experimental studies have shown cardiac telerehabilitation to be effective and cost-effective, but there is inadequate evidence about how to translate this research into routine clinical practice.

objectiveThis systematic review aimed to synthesize research evaluating the effectiveness of implementing cardiac telerehabilitation interventions at scale in routine clinical practice, including factors underlying successful implementation processes, and experimental research evaluating implementation-related outcomes.

methodsMEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Global Health databases were searched from 1990 through November 9, 2018, for studies evaluating the implementation of telerehabilitation for the self-management of CHD. Reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews were hand searched to identify additional studies. Implementation outcomes of interest included acceptability, appropriateness, adoption, feasibility, fidelity, implementation cost, penetration, and sustainability. A narrative synthesis of results was carried out.

resultsNo included studies evaluated the implementation of cardiac telerehabilitation in routine clinical practice. A total of 10 studies of 2250 participants evaluated implementation outcomes, including acceptability (8/10, 80%), appropriateness (9/10, 90%), adoption (6/10, 60%), feasibility (6/10, 60%), fidelity (7/10, 70%), and implementation cost (4/10, 40%), predominantly from the participant perspective. Cardiac telerehabilitation interventions had high acceptance among the majority of participants, but technical challenges such as reliable broadband internet connectivity can impact acceptability and feasibility. Many participants considered telerehabilitation to be an appropriate alternative CR delivery model, as it was convenient, flexible, and easy to access. Participants valued interactive intervention components, such as real-time exercise monitoring and feedback as well as individualized support. The penetration and sustainability of cardiac telerehabilitation, as well as the perspectives of CR practitioners and health care organizations, have received little attention in existing cardiac telerehabilitation research.

conclusionsExperimental trials suggest that participants perceive cardiac telerehabilitation to be an acceptable and appropriate approach to improve the reach and utilization of CR, but pragmatic implementation studies are needed to understand how interventions can be sustainably translated from research into clinical practice. Addressing this gap could help realize the potential impact of telerehabilitation on CR accessibility and participation as well as person-centered, health, and economic outcomes.

trial registrationInternational Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) CRD42019124254; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=124254.

Indexed as

Cardiovascular DiseasesSelf-ManagementTelerehabilitationExerciseHumansSecondary Preventioncardiac rehabilitationheart diseasesimplementation sciencesmartphonesystematic reviewtelerehabilitation

Identifiers

PMID33245286
PMCPMC7732711
OpenAlexW3042328429

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.