Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38264703›Full record

ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2024

Expanding access to telehealth in Australian cardiac rehabilitation services: a national survey of barriers, enablers, and uptake.

Emma E Thomas, Susie Cartledge, Barbara Murphy, Bridget Abell, Robyn Gallagher, Carolyn Astley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. 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

6 authors.

Emma E ThomasCentre for Online Health, The University of Queensland, Bldg 33, Princess Alexandra Hospital, Woolloongabba, Brisbane, Queensland 4103, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8415-0521
Susie CartledgeSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, 553 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6837-2244
Barbara MurphyAustralian Centre for Heart Health, 75-79 Chetwynd St, North Melbourne, Victoria 3051, Australia.
Bridget AbellAustralian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), 60 Musk Ave, Kelvin Grove, Brisbane, Queensland 4059, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1324-4536
Robyn GallagherSusan Wakil School of Nursing and Midwifery, The University of Sydney, Western Ave, Camperdown, Sydney, New South Wales 2050, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5588-9351
Carolyn AstleyCollege of Nursing and Health Science, Flinders University, North Sturt Road, Bedford Park, Adelaide, South Australia 5042, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9078-5969

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Aims: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is traditionally delivered in-person; however, the COVID-19 pandemic provided impetus for alternative offerings such as telehealth. We investigated uptake, barriers, and enablers in a national survey during the pandemic in Australia. Methods and results: We surveyed CR programmes between April and June 2021 using professional association networks. The anonymous online questionnaire addressed programme characteristics, COVID-19 impacts, and barriers to and enablers of telehealth use. Open-text responses were coded and presented as themes. In total, there were responses from 105 programmes (33% response rate). All states and geographical areas were represented. The use of every modality of telehealth care (telephone, video conferencing, text messaging, and web-based) increased significantly during and after COVID with a strong preference for telephone (85% of services). Respondents perceived video (53%) and telephone (47%) formats as safe and effective for delivering CR. The most common barriers to telehealth were difficulties conducting assessments and reduced engagement with patients. Prominent enablers were increased reach and reduced patient barriers to CR access. Conclusion: Telehealth use by CR programmes increased during the peak pandemic period. However, additional support is required to ensure that telehealth services can be maintained. There is considerable potential to increase the reach of CR by embedding telehealth into existing models of care.

Indexed as

Cardiac rehabilitationHealth service deliverySARS-CoV-2Telehealth

Identifiers

PMID38264703
PMCPMC10802819

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.