Effects and costs of real-time cardiac telerehabilitation: Randomised controlled non-inferiority trial

278Citations
Citations of this article
534Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective Compare the effects and costs of remotely monitored exercise-based cardiac telerehabilitation (REMOTE-CR) with centre-based programmes (CBexCR) in adults with coronary heart disease (CHD). Methods Participants were randomised to receive 12 weeks of telerehabilitation or centre-based rehabilitation. REMOTE-CR provided individualised exercise prescription, real-time exercise monitoring/coaching and theory-based behavioural strategies via a bespoke telerehabilitation platform; CBexCR provided individualised exercise prescription and coaching via established rehabilitation clinics. Outcomes assessed at baseline, 12 and/or 24 weeks included maximal oxygen uptake (VO 2 max, primary) modifiable cardiovascular risk factors, exercise adherence, motivation, health-related quality of life and programme delivery, hospital service utilisation and medication costs. The primary hypothesis was a non-inferior between-group difference in VO 2 max at 12 weeks (inferiority margin=-1.25 mL/kg/min); inferiority margins were not set for secondary outcomes. Results 162 participants (mean 61±12.7 years, 86% men) were randomised. VO 2 max was comparable in both groups at 12 weeks and REMOTE-CR was non-inferior to CBexCR (REMOTE-CR-CBexCR adjusted mean difference (AMD)=0.51 (95% CI-0.97 to 1.98) mL/kg/min, p=0.48). REMOTE-CR participants were less sedentary at 24 weeks (AMD=-61.5 (95% CI-117.8 to-5.3) min/day, p=0.03), while CBexCR participants had smaller waist (AMD=1.71 (95% CI 0.09 to 3.34) cm, p=0.04) and hip circumferences (AMD=1.16 (95% CI 0.06 to 2.27) cm, p=0.04) at 12 weeks. No other between-group differences were detected. Per capita programme delivery (NZD1130/GBP573 vs NZD3466/GBP1758) and medication costs (NZD331/GBP168 vs NZD605/GBP307, p=0.02) were lower for REMOTE-CR. Hospital service utilisation costs were not statistically significantly different (NZD3459/GBP1754 vs NZD5464/GBP2771, p=0.20). Conclusion REMOTE-CR is an effective, cost-efficient alternative delivery model that could-as a complement to existing services-improve overall utilisation rates by increasing reach and satisfying unique participant preferences.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Maddison, R., Rawstorn, J. C., Stewart, R. A. H., Benatar, J., Whittaker, R., Rolleston, A., … Gant, N. (2019). Effects and costs of real-time cardiac telerehabilitation: Randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Heart, 105(2), 122–129. https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2018-313189

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free