ArticleThoracic research and practice2023
Does Telerehabilitation for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients Discharged with Oxygen Shorten the Time of Weaning from Oxygen?
Article in Thoracic research and practice, 2023. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEarly pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) and acute and post-acute mobilization with telemonitoring and telerehabilitation (TR) have been recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. We aimed to compare the duration of weaning from oxygen in patients with hypoxemic COVID-19 who received PR and those who did not. MATERIAL AND
methodsThis study was designed as a quasi-experimental study and was conducted on patients discharged with oxygen supplementation between December 2021 and May 2022. They were compared with patients who received PR and those who did not in terms of the duration of oxygen use.
resultsA total of 61 patients (9 women in each group) completed the study. The mean age was 65 ± 12. Thirty patients underwent PR (group 1) and the remaining 31 patients were classified as control group (group 2). When the groups were compared in terms of duration of oxygen use, patients who performed PR were statistically significant shorter duration than those who did not (P = .012). In addition, PR improved their quality of life compared to group 2.
conclusionIt was concluded that although PR has many indications, it is also effective, feasible, and safe in prolonged infections and it was thought that TR may also be effective as supervised PR.
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.