Detail
Článek
FT
Medvik - BMČ
  • Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?

Is the Training Intensity in Phase Two Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Different in Telehealth versus Outpatient Rehabilitation

L. Batalik, G. Pepera, J. Papathanasiou, S. Rutkowski, D. Líška, K. Batalikova, M. Hartman, M. Felšőci, F. Dosbaba

. 2021 ; 10 (18) : . [pub] 20210909

Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko

Typ dokumentu časopisecké články

Perzistentní odkaz   https://www.medvik.cz/link/bmc21023976

Grantová podpora
ref. no. 65269705 Ministerstvo Zdravotnictví Ceské Republiky

Telehealth cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a feasible and effective alternative to conventional outpatient CR. Present evidence is limited on the comparison of exercise intensity adherence in telehealth and outpatient CR. The purpose of the study was to evaluate and compare training intensity adherence through 12-week phase II CR in telehealth and outpatient CR. A sample of 56 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) with a mean age of 56.7 ± 7.1 entering comprehensive secondary prevention phase II was randomized into telehealth CR (n = 28) and control outpatient CR (n = 28) groups. The primary outcome was a comparison of training intensity adherence in both CR models and heart rate (HR) response from individual CR sessions, expressed by the HR reserve percentage. As a result, the parameter HR reserve percentage as the total average of the training intensity during the telehealth intervention and the outpatient CR did not differ statistically (p = 0.63). There was no death case, and all severe adverse cases required medical admission throughout an exercise training session in study subjects in both groups. This research evidence demonstrated that the telehealth CR model is similar in training intensities to the conventional outpatient CR in CAD patients with low to moderate cardiovascular risk.

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc21023976
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20211013134104.0
007      
ta
008      
211006s2021 sz f 000 0|eng||
009      
AR
024    7_
$a 10.3390/jcm10184069 $2 doi
035    __
$a (PubMed)34575185
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a eng
044    __
$a sz
100    1_
$a Batalik, Ladislav $u Department of Rehabilitation, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic $u Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic
245    10
$a Is the Training Intensity in Phase Two Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Different in Telehealth versus Outpatient Rehabilitation / $c L. Batalik, G. Pepera, J. Papathanasiou, S. Rutkowski, D. Líška, K. Batalikova, M. Hartman, M. Felšőci, F. Dosbaba
520    9_
$a Telehealth cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a feasible and effective alternative to conventional outpatient CR. Present evidence is limited on the comparison of exercise intensity adherence in telehealth and outpatient CR. The purpose of the study was to evaluate and compare training intensity adherence through 12-week phase II CR in telehealth and outpatient CR. A sample of 56 patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) with a mean age of 56.7 ± 7.1 entering comprehensive secondary prevention phase II was randomized into telehealth CR (n = 28) and control outpatient CR (n = 28) groups. The primary outcome was a comparison of training intensity adherence in both CR models and heart rate (HR) response from individual CR sessions, expressed by the HR reserve percentage. As a result, the parameter HR reserve percentage as the total average of the training intensity during the telehealth intervention and the outpatient CR did not differ statistically (p = 0.63). There was no death case, and all severe adverse cases required medical admission throughout an exercise training session in study subjects in both groups. This research evidence demonstrated that the telehealth CR model is similar in training intensities to the conventional outpatient CR in CAD patients with low to moderate cardiovascular risk.
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Pepera, Garyfallia $u Physiotherapy Department, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Thessaly, 35100 Lamia, Greece
700    1_
$a Papathanasiou, Jannis $u Department of Medical Imaging, Allergology & Physiotherapy, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University of Plovdiv, 4002 Plovdiv, Bulgaria $u Department of Kinesitherapy, Faculty of Public Health "Prof. Dr. Tzecomir Vodenicharov, Ph.D", Medical University of Sofia, 1431 Sofia, Bulgaria
700    1_
$a Rutkowski, Sebastian $u Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy, Opole University of Technology, 45-758 Opole, Poland
700    1_
$a Líška, David $u Faculty of Arts, Department of Physical Education and Sports, Matej Bel University, 97401 Banská Bystrica, Slovakia
700    1_
$a Batalikova, Katerina $u Department of Rehabilitation, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Hartman, Martin $u Department of Rehabilitation, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Felšőci, Marián $u Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiology, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic $u Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiology, Faculty of Medicine, Masaryk University, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic
700    1_
$a Dosbaba, Filip $u Department of Rehabilitation, University Hospital Brno, 62500 Brno, Czech Republic
773    0_
$w MED00195462 $t Journal of clinical medicine $x 2077-0383 $g Roč. 10, č. 18 (2021)
856    41
$u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34575185 $y Pubmed
910    __
$a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y - $z 0
990    __
$a 20211006 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20211013134101 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ind $b bmc $g 1708151 $s 1144470
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2021 $b 10 $c 18 $e 20210909 $i 2077-0383 $m Journal of clinical medicine $n J Clin Med $x MED00195462
GRA    __
$a ref. no. 65269705 $p Ministerstvo Zdravotnictví Ceské Republiky
LZP    __
$a Pubmed-20211006

Najít záznam

Citační ukazatele

Možnosti archivace