Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38533308›Full record

ReviewDigital health

Safety and long-term outcomes of remote cardiac rehabilitation in coronary heart disease patients: A systematic review.

Varsamo Antoniou, Eleni Kapreli, Constantinos H Davos, Ladislav Batalik, Garyfallia Pepera

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
15.3field-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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Varsamo AntoniouClinical Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Laboratory, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, University of Thessaly, Lamia, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8029-9767
Eleni KapreliClinical Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Laboratory, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, University of Thessaly, Lamia, Greece.
Constantinos H DavosCardiovascular Research Laboratory, Biomedical Research Foundation, Academy of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Ladislav BatalikDepartment of Rehabilitation, University Hospital Brno, Brno, Czech Republic.
Garyfallia PeperaClinical Exercise Physiology and Rehabilitation Laboratory, Department of Physiotherapy, School of Health Sciences, University of Thessaly, Lamia, Greece.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8012-0325
University of Thessaly · GRAcademy of Athens · GRMasaryk University · CZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To systematically review the safety and the long-term mortality and morbidity risk-rates of the remotely-delivered cardiac rehabilitation (RDCR) interventions in coronary heart disease (CHD) patients. Methods: The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42023455471). Five databases (Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials in the Cochrane Library, Cinahl and Web of Science) were reviewed from January 2012 up to August 2023. Inclusion criteria were: (a) randomized controlled trials, (b) RDCR implementation of at least 12 weeks duration, (c) assessment of safety, rates of serious adverse events (SAEs) and re-hospitalization incidences at endpoints more than 6 months. Three reviewers independently performed data extraction and assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Results: 14 studies were identified involving 2012 participants and a range of RDCR duration between 3 months to 1 year. The incidence rate of exercise-related SAEs was estimated at 1 per 53,770 patient-hours of RDCR exercise. A non-statistically significant reduction in the re-hospitalization rates and the days lost due to hospitalization was noticed in the RDCR groups. There were no exercise-related deaths. The overall study quality was of low risk. Conclusions: RDCR can act as a safe alternative delivery mode of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). The low long-term rates of reported SAEs and re-hospitalization incidences of the RDCR could enhance the uptake rates of CR interventions. However, further investigation is needed in larger populations and longer assessment points.

Indexed as

Cardiac rehabilitationcoronary heart diseasedigital cardiac rehabilitationdigital healthmorbiditymortality rateremotesafetysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38533308
PMCPMC10964460
OpenAlexW4393212369

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.