Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35634888›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2022

Cardiac telerehabilitation in a middle-income country: analysis of adherence, effectiveness and cost through a randomized clinical trial.

Ana P DE Lima, Danielle G Pereira, Isabella O Nascimento, Thiago H Martins, Anne C Oliveira, Tiago S Nogueira, Raquel R Britto

Open access · diamondAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ana P DE LimaUniversity Center of Belo Horizonte (Uni-BH), Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Danielle G PereiraDepartment of Physiotherapy, Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Brazil - danielleufmg@gmail.com.
Isabella O NascimentoDepartment of Physiotherapy, Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Thiago H MartinsDepartment of Physiotherapy, Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Anne C OliveiraDepartment of Physiotherapy, Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Tiago S NogueiraDepartment of Physiotherapy, Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Raquel R BrittoDepartment of Physiotherapy, Federal University of Minas Gerais (UFMG), Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BRCentro Universitário de Belo Horizonte · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe benefits of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) are already well established; however, such intervention has been underused, mainly in low- and middle-income countries.

aimTo compare adherence, effectiveness, and cost of a home CR with the traditional CR (TCR) in a middle-income country (MIC).

designSingle-blind randomized control trial.

settingA university hospital. POPULATION: Individuals with coronary disease that were eligible were invited to participate. A randomized sample of 51 individuals was selected, where two participants were not included by not meeting inclusion criteria.

methodsThe home-CR group participated in health education activities, carried out two supervised exercise sessions, and was instructed to carry out 58 sessions at home. Weekly telephone calls were made. The TCR group held 24 supervised exercise sessions and were instructed to carry out 36 sessions at home.

results49 individuals (42 male, 56.37±10.35years) participated in the study, 23 in the home-CR group and 26 in the TCR group. After the intervention, adherence in the home-CR and TCR groups was 94.18% and 79.08%, respectively, with no significant difference (P=0.191). Both protocols were effective for the other variables, with no differences. The cost per patient for the service was lower in the home-CR (US$ 59.31) than in the TCR group (US$ 135.05).

conclusionsCR performed at home in an MIC demonstrated similar adherence and effectiveness compared to the TCR program, but with a lower cost for the service. The results corroborate the possibility of using home CR programs, even in MICs, after exercise risk stratification and under remote supervision. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Home-CR can contribute to overcome participants' barriers with compatible cost. Home-CR is effective in improving functional capacity and risk factors control. Perform risk stratification and remote supervision are essential to offer Home-CR.

Indexed as

Cardiac RehabilitationTelerehabilitationAgedExercise TherapyFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSingle-Blind Method

Identifiers

PMID35634888
PMCPMC9980526
OpenAlexW4281628426

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.