Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34142970›Full record

ArticleJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2021

Effectiveness of Distance Technology in Promoting Physical Activity in Cardiovascular Disease Rehabilitation: Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial, A Pilot Study.

Sanna Hakala, Heikki Kivistö, Teemu Paajanen, Annaliisa Kankainen, Marjo-Riitta Anttila, Ari Heinonen, Tuulikki Sjögren

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sanna HakalaUniversity of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2425-8749
Heikki KivistöUniversity of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3706-4038
Teemu PaajanenUniversity of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3499-4800
Annaliisa KankainenUniversity of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3630-253X
Marjo-Riitta AnttilaUniversity of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6950-4261
Ari HeinonenUniversity of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3681-9953
Tuulikki SjögrenUniversity of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6908-4618
University of Jyväskylä · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysical activity is beneficial for cardiovascular rehabilitation. Digitalization suggests using technology in the promotion of physical activity and lifestyle changes. The effectiveness of distance technology interventions has previously been found to be similar to that of conventional treatment, but the added value of the technology has not been frequently studied.

objectiveThe aim of this pilot study was to investigate whether additional distance technology intervention is more effective in promoting physical activity than non-technology-based treatment in 12 months of cardiac rehabilitation.

methodsThe cardiovascular disease rehabilitation intervention consisted of three 5-day inpatient periods in a rehabilitation center and two 6-month self-exercise periods at home in between. Participants were recruited from among cardiac patients who attended the rehabilitation program and were cluster-randomized into unblinded groups: conventional rehabilitation control clusters (n=3) and similar rehabilitation with additional distance technology experimental group clusters (n=3). Experimental groups used Fitbit Charge HR for self-monitoring, and they set goals and reported their activity using Movendos mCoach, through which they received monthly automated and in-person feedback. Physical activity outcomes for all participants were measured using the Fitbit Zip accelerometer and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire.

resultsDuring the first 6 months, the experimental group (n=29) engaged in light physical activity more often than the control group (n=30; mean difference [MD] 324.2 minutes per week, 95% CI 77.4 to 571.0; P=.01). There were no group differences in the duration of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MD 12.6 minutes per week, 95% CI -90.5 to 115.7; P=.82) or steps per day (MD 1084.0, 95% CI -585.0 to 2752.9; P=.20). During the following 6 months, no differences between the groups were observed in light physical activity (MD -87.9 minutes per week, 95% CI -379.2 to 203.3; P=.54), moderate to vigorous physical activity (MD 70.9 minutes per week, 95% CI -75.7 to 217.6; P=.33), or steps per day (MD 867.1, 95% CI -2099.6 to 3833.9; P=.55).

conclusionsThe use of additional distance technology increased the duration of light physical activity at the beginning of cardiac rehabilitation (for the first 6 months), but statistically significant differences were not observed between the two groups for moderate or vigorous physical activity or steps per day for both 6-month self-exercise periods.

trial registrationISRCTN Registry ISRCTN61225589; https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN61225589.

Indexed as

cardiac rehabilitationcardiovascular diseasesclinical trialexerciserandomized controlled trialrehabilitationtechnology

Identifiers

PMID34142970
PMCPMC8277324
OpenAlexW3154650192

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.