ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2026
Feasibility of early interval training in patients recovering from heart valve surgery due to infective endocarditis.
Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05703022 (Early Exercise Training in Patients Following Heart Valve Surgery for Infective Endocarditis. A Feasibility Study.), which is not on this 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.
Early Exercise Training in Patients Following Heart Valve Surgery for Infective Endocarditis. A Feasibility Study.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInfective endocarditis is an infectious heart disease strongly associated with morbidity and mortality. Up to half of the patients with infective endocarditis require heart valve surgery. While early exercise-based rehabilitation is well documented for patients recovering from heart surgery for non-infective endocarditis, there is limited research on those who have undergone valve surgery due to this infection. This study aimed to explore the early aerobic training in this patient population.
methodsA single-centre prospective feasibility study was conducted using the UK Medical Research Council's framework for complex interventions. The study investigated the feasibility (recruitment, retention, adherence), safety, acceptability, and preliminary functional outcomes of 4 × 4 interval training in this patient population. Training session data included the number, duration, and intensity, which were monitored via the Apple Watch S5 (Present Age-Predicted Maximum Heart Rate) and the Borg RPE scale. Functional outcomes were evaluated at baseline and 3 months post-surgery, including sub-maximal oxygen uptake (treadmill protocol), 6-min walk test, and quality of life (HeartQoL, EQ-5D-5L).
resultsSixteen patients consented to participate, with 12 initiating the intervention and 11 completing it, yielding a retention rate of 91.7%. Training adherence averaged 73.1% of the minimum expected sessions, with high participant satisfaction and no serious adverse events reported. At the 12-week follow-up, participants demonstrated measurable change in functional capacity, including an increase in workload capacity (+ 95 W), METs (+ 3.4), and 6-min walk test distance (+ 219 m). Health-related quality of life also showed a noticeable increase, with HeartQoL physical and emotional scores increasing by 1.0 and 1.3, respectively, and EQ-5D-5L VAS scores rising by 17.2. The EQ-5D-5L index increased from 0.61 at baseline to 0.87 after 12 weeks.
conclusionInterval training, when conducted with appropriate safeguards and tailored to individual needs, is a feasible and safe intervention for patients recovering from endocarditis and cardiac surgery. The observed improvements in functional capacity, quality of life, and patient satisfaction support the need for larger controlled studies.
trial registrationClinical Trials, ID NCT05703022. Registered on 25 November 2021, http://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov.
Indexed as
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.