-
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
Jazyk angličtina Země Švýcarsko
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články
Grantová podpora
ref. no. 65269705
Ministerstvo Zdravotnictví Ceské Republiky
Free Medical Journals od 2012
PubMed Central od 2012
Europe PubMed Central od 2012
ProQuest Central od 2019-01-01
Open Access Digital Library od 2012-01-01
Open Access Digital Library od 2012-01-01
Health & Medicine (ProQuest) od 2019-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources od 2012
Odkazy
PubMed
34575185
DOI
10.3390/jcm10184069
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
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.
Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiology University Hospital Brno 62500 Brno Czech Republic
Department of Public Health Faculty of Medicine Masaryk University 62500 Brno Czech Republic
Department of Rehabilitation University Hospital Brno 62500 Brno Czech Republic
Faculty of Physical Education and Physiotherapy Opole University of Technology 45 758 Opole Poland
Physiotherapy Department Faculty of Health Sciences University of Thessaly 35100 Lamia Greece
- 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