Remotely Delivered Cardiac Rehabilitation Exercise for Coronary Heart Disease: Nonrandomized Feasibility Study

Background Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is recommended for coronary heart disease (CHD). However, poor uptake of and poor adherence to CR exercise programs have been reported globally. Delivering CR exercise classes remotely may remove some of the barriers associated with traditional hospital- or center-based CR. Objective We have developed a bespoke platform, Eastern Corridor Medical Engineering Centre–Cardiac Rehabilitation (ECME-CR), to support remotely delivered CR exercise. This pilot trial sought to test the ECME-CR platform and examine the efficacy and feasibility of a remote CR exercise program compared to a traditional center-based program. Methods In all, 21 participants with CHD were recruited and assigned to either the intervention or control group. Both groups performed the same 8-week exercise program. Participants in the intervention group took part in web-based exercise classes and used the ECME-CR platform during the intervention period, whereas participants in the control group attended in-person classes. Outcomes were assessed at baseline and following the 8-week intervention period. The primary outcome measure was exercise capacity, assessed using a 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Secondary outcomes included measurement of grip strength, self-reported quality of life, heart rate, blood pressure, and body composition. A series of mixed between-within subjects ANOVA were conducted to examine the mean differences in study outcomes between and within groups. Participant adherence to the exercise program was also analyzed. Results In all, 8 participants (male: n=5; age: mean 69.7, SD 7.2 years; height: mean 163.9, SD 5.4 cm; weight: mean 81.6, SD 14.1 kg) in the intervention group and 9 participants (male: n=9; age: mean 69.8, SD 8.2 years; height: mean 173.8, SD 5.2 cm; weight: mean 94.4, SD 18.0 kg) in the control group completed the exercise program. Although improvements in 6MWT distance were observed from baseline to follow-up in both the intervention (mean 490.1, SD 80.2 m to mean 504.5, SD 93.7 m) and control (mean 510.2, SD 48.3 m to mean 520.6, SD 49.4 m) group, no significant interaction effect (F1,14=.026; P=.87) nor effect for time (F1,14=2.51; P=.14) were observed. No significant effects emerged for any of the other secondary end points (all P>.0275). Adherence to the exercise program was high in both the intervention (14.25/16, 89.1%) and control (14.33/16, 89.6%) group. No adverse events or safety issues were reported in either group during the study. Conclusions This pilot trial did not show evidence of significant positive effect for either the remotely delivered or center-based program. The 6MWT may not have been sufficiently sensitive to identify a change in this cohort of participants with stable CHD. This trial does provide evidence that remote CR exercise, supported with digital self-monitoring, is feasible and may be considered for individuals less likely to participate in traditional center-based programs. International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) RR2-10.2196/31855

[1]  Wen‐Chih Wu,et al.  Cardiovascular Outcomes of Patients Referred to Home Based Cardiac Rehabilitation , 2021, Heart & Lung.

[2]  Oonagh M. Giggins,et al.  Delivering Cardiac Rehabilitation Exercise Virtually Using a Digital Health Platform (ECME-CR): Protocol for a Pilot Trial , 2021, JMIR research protocols.

[3]  R. Barakat,et al.  Adherence is a key factor for interpreting the results of exercise interventions. , 2021, Physiotherapy.

[4]  W. Tam,et al.  Effectiveness of home-based cardiac telerehabilitation as an alternative to Phase 2 cardiac rehabilitation of coronary heart disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2021, European journal of preventive cardiology.

[5]  M. Börjesson,et al.  Participation in exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation is related to reduced total mortality in both men and women: results from the SWEDEHEART registry. , 2021, European journal of preventive cardiology.

[6]  S. Marzolini,et al.  Impacts of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Cardiac Rehabilitation Delivery around the World , 2020, medRxiv.

[7]  C. Lavie,et al.  Current challenges in cardiac rehabilitation: strategies to overcome social factors and attendance barriers , 2020, Expert review of cardiovascular therapy.

[8]  C. Reid,et al.  SMARTphone-based, early cardiac REHABilitation in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a randomized controlled trial , 2020, Coronary artery disease.

[9]  Junbo Ge,et al.  Smartphone and social media-based cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention in China (SMART-CR/SP): a parallel-group, single-blind, randomised controlled trial. , 2019, The Lancet. Digital health.

[10]  Daniel E Forman,et al.  Home-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Scientific Statement From the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, the American Heart Association, and the American College of Cardiology. , 2019, Circulation.

[11]  C. Lavie,et al.  Making cardiac rehabilitation more available and affordable , 2018, Heart.

[12]  Nicholas Gant,et al.  Effects and costs of real-time cardiac telerehabilitation: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial , 2018, Heart.

[13]  L. Ge,et al.  Exercise training modalities in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and network meta-analysis , 2018, International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity.

[14]  R. Taylor,et al.  Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation. , 2017, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[15]  R. Aguilar-Jiménez,et al.  Effectiveness and safety of a home-based cardiac rehabilitation programme of mixed surveillance in patients with ischemic heart disease at moderate cardiovascular risk: A randomised, controlled clinical trial , 2017, BMC Cardiovascular Disorders.

[16]  Lisa M. Sullivan,et al.  Common Statistical Pitfalls in Basic Science Research , 2016, Journal of the American Heart Association.

[17]  L. Prokop,et al.  The Effects of Exercise on Fatigue, Quality of Life, and Psychological Function for Men with Prostate Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analyses. , 2016, European urology focus.

[18]  Rod S Taylor,et al.  Exercise-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation for Coronary Heart Disease: Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. , 2016, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[19]  Wei Liu,et al.  Telehealth interventions versus center-based cardiac rehabilitation of coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis , 2015, European journal of preventive cardiology.

[20]  Mark R Schultz,et al.  False discovery rate control is a recommended alternative to Bonferroni-type adjustments in health studies. , 2014, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[21]  P. Dendale,et al.  Participating or not in a cardiac rehabilitation programme: factors influencing a patient’s decision , 2013, European journal of preventive cardiology.

[22]  Lewis Adams,et al.  The 6-minute walk test in outpatient cardiac rehabilitation: validity, reliability and responsiveness--a systematic review. , 2012, Physiotherapy.

[23]  Julie Redfern,et al.  Participating in cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative data , 2012, European journal of preventive cardiology.

[24]  S. Ebrahim,et al.  Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease. , 2016, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[25]  J. Casillas,et al.  DETERMINING THE MINIMAL CLINICALLY IMPORTANT 1 DIFFERENCE FOR THE SIX-MINUTE WALK TEST AND THE 2002 METER FAST WALK TEST DURING CARDIAC REHABILITATION 3 PROGRAM IN CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE PATIENTS AFTER 4 ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME , 2017 .

[26]  L. Skovgaard,et al.  Home-based cardiac rehabilitation is as effective as centre-based cardiac rehabilitation among elderly with coronary heart disease: results from a randomised clinical trial. , 2011, Age and ageing.

[27]  Tiffany Moxham,et al.  Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation. , 2010, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[28]  Adrian Bauman,et al.  Telehealth interventions for the secondary prevention of coronary heart disease: a systematic review , 2009, European journal of cardiovascular prevention and rehabilitation : official journal of the European Society of Cardiology, Working Groups on Epidemiology & Prevention and Cardiac Rehabilitation and Exercise Physiology.

[29]  H. Dalal,et al.  Cardiac rehabilitation in the United Kingdom , 2008, Heart.

[30]  N. Oldridge,et al.  Improved Exercise Tolerance and Quality of Life With Cardiac Rehabilitation of Older Patients After Myocardial Infarction: Results of a Randomized, Controlled Trial , 2003, Circulation.

[31]  R. McKelvie,et al.  A controlled trial of hospital versus home-based exercise in cardiac patients. , 2002, Medicine and science in sports and exercise.

[32]  I. Piña,et al.  A controlled trial of cardiac rehabilitation in the home setting using electrocardiographic and voice transtelephonic monitoring. , 2000, American heart journal.

[33]  E. Heath Borg's Perceived Exertion and Pain Scales , 1998 .

[34]  G. Borg Borg's Perceived Exertion and Pain Scales , 1998 .

[35]  J. Ware,et al.  A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. , 1996, Medical care.

[36]  P. Thompson,et al.  ACSM's Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription , 1995 .

[37]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[38]  D. Lawlor,et al.  Exercise for Depression. , 1978, The Physician and sportsmedicine.