A randomized controlled clinical trial of cardiac telerehabilitation with a prolonged mobile care monitoring strategy after an acute coronary syndrome

The Effects of mHealth Interventions on Quality of Life, Anxiety, and Depression in Patients With Coronary Heart Disease: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the leading cause of death globally. In addition, 20% to 40% of the patients with CHD have comorbid mental health issues such as anxiety or depression, affecting the prognosis and quality of life (QoL). Mobile health (mHealth) interventions have been developed and are widely used; however, the evidence for the effects of mHealth interventions on QoL, anxiety, and depression in patients with CHD is currently ambiguous.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we aimed to assess the effects of mHealth interventions on QoL, anxiety, and depression in patients with CHD.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases from inception to August 12, 2023. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials that involved patients with CHD who received mHealth interventions and that reported on QoL, anxiety, or depression outcomes. We used the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials to evaluate the risk of bias in the studies, ensuring a rigorous and methodologically sound analysis. Review Manager (desktop version 5.4; The Cochrane Collaboration) and Stata MP (version 17.0; StataCorp LLC) were used to conduct the meta-analysis. The effect size was calculated using the standardized mean difference (SMD) and its 95% CI.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 23 studies (5406 participants in total) and showed that mHealth interventions significantly improved QoL in patients with CHD (SMD 0.49, 95% CI 0.25-0.72; Z=4.07; P<.001) as well as relieved their anxiety (SMD -0.46, 95% CI -0.83 to -0.08; Z=2.38; P=.02) and depression (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.56 to -0.12; Z=3.00; P=.003) compared to usual care. The subgroup analyses indicated a significant effect favoring the mHealth intervention on reducing anxiety and depressive symptoms compared to usual care, especially when (1) the intervention duration was ≥6 months (P=.04 and P=.001), (2) the mHealth intervention was a simple one (only 1 mHealth intervention was used) (P=.01 and P<.001), (3) it was implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic (P=.04 and P=.01), (4) it was implemented in low- or middle-income countries (P=.01 and P=.02), (5) the intervention focused on mental health (P=.01 and P=.007), and (6) adherence rates were high (≥90%; P=.03 and P=.002). In addition, comparing mHealth interventions to usual care, there was an improvement in QoL when (1) the mHealth intervention was a simple one (P<.001), (2) it was implemented in low- or middle-income countries (P<.001), and (3) the intervention focused on mental health (P<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the existing evidence, mHealth interventions might be effective in improving QoL and reducing anxiety and depression in patients with CHD. However, large sample, high-quality, and rigorously designed randomized controlled trials are needed to provide further evidence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022383858; https://tinyurl.com/3ea2npxf.

Effectiveness and Feasibility of Telehealth-Based Dietary Interventions Targeting Cardiovascular Disease Risk Factors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Telehealth-based dietary interventions were recommended for cardiovascular disease (CVD) management during the COVID-19 pandemic; however, data regarding their effectiveness and feasibility are limited.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to examine (1) the effectiveness of telehealth-based dietary interventions in improving clinical CVD risk factors and (2) the feasibility of these interventions among individuals with CVD.

METHODS

To conduct this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 2 investigators searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases based on predetermined search terms and included English-language RCTs published between January 2000 and July 2022. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used to assess RCT quality. To evaluate intervention effectiveness, weight, BMI, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and levels of total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, or blood glucose were compared postintervention in telehealth and usual care (UC) groups. Feasibility was determined through the number of participants retained in intervention and UC groups. Pooled data for each CVD outcome were analyzed using a random effects model. Mean difference (MD), standardized MD, or risk ratio were calculated using R software.

RESULTS

A total of 13 RCTs with 3013 participants were included in the analysis to assess the effectiveness and feasibility of telehealth-based dietary interventions among individuals with CVD. Participants had a mean age of 61.0 (SD 3.7) years, and 18.5% (n=559) were women. Approximately one-third of RCTs were conducted in the United States (n=4, 31%). Included studies used telephone, app, text, audio-visual media, or website-based interventions. Of the 13 included studies, 3 were of high quality, 9 were of moderate quality, and only 1 was of low quality. Pooled estimates showed systolic blood pressure (MD -2.74, 95% CI -4.93 to -0.56) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (standardized MD -0.11, 95% CI -0.19 to -0.03) to be significantly improved among individuals with CVD as a result of telehealth-based dietary interventions compared to UC. No significant difference in effectiveness was detected for weight, BMI, and levels of diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein, and triglycerides between telehealth-based dietary interventions and UC among those with CVD. There was no significant difference between the feasibility of telehealth-based dietary interventions versus UC. Significant I2 indicated moderate to considerable heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Telehealth-based dietary interventions show promise in addressing CVD risk factors.

Completeness of intervention reporting in randomised trials of technology-enabled remote or hybrid exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review using the TIDieR framework

BACKGROUND

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation improves clinical outcomes and quality of life. Technology-enabled delivery of remote cardiac rehabilitation is as effective in improving health outcomes as in-person delivery and has the potential to transform clinical service delivery. However, for the successful translation of research to clinical practice, interventions must be adequately reported in the literature.

METHODS

Systematic review of MedLine, CINAHL, PubMed and SPORT Discus databases applying PRISMA guidance. Randomised controlled trials of remote or hybrid technology-enabled exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation interventions were included. Completeness of reporting was evaluated against the TIDieR checklist.

RESULTS

The search strategy returned 162 articles which, following screening, resulted in 12 randomised trials being included containing data for 1588 participants. No trial fully reported their rehabilitation intervention as per the 12-item TIDieR checklist, with a median score of eight out of 12 categories. Notably, intervention detail, dosage and modification were comparatively poorly reported.

CONCLUSION

Technology-enabled remotely delivered cardiac rehabilitation may be effective at improving cardiovascular fitness; however, the quality of reporting of these interventions in randomised trials is insufficient for replication which has material implications for translation into clinical practice.

Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease is the most common cause of death globally. Traditionally, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes are offered to individuals after cardiac events to aid recovery and prevent further cardiac illness. Home-based and technology-supported cardiac rehabilitation programmes have been introduced in an attempt to widen access and participation, especially during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. This is an update of a review previously published in 2009, 2015, and 2017.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effect of home-based (which may include digital/telehealth interventions) and supervised centre-based cardiac rehabilitation on mortality and morbidity, exercise-capacity, health-related quality of life, and modifiable cardiac risk factors in patients with heart disease SEARCH METHODS: We updated searches from the previous Cochrane Review by searching the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid) and CINAHL (EBSCO) on 16 September 2022. We also searched two clinical trials registers as well as previous systematic reviews and reference lists of included studies. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials that compared centre-based cardiac rehabilitation (e.g. hospital, sports/community centre) with home-based programmes (± digital/telehealth platforms) in adults with myocardial infarction, angina, heart failure, or who had undergone revascularisation.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened all identified references for inclusion based on predefined inclusion criteria. Disagreements were resolved through discussion or by involving a third review author. Two authors independently extracted outcome data and study characteristics and assessed risk of bias. Certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included three new trials in this update, bringing a total of 24 trials that have randomised a total of 3046 participants undergoing cardiac rehabilitation. A further nine studies were identified and are awaiting classification. Manual searching of trial registers until 16 September 2022 revealed a further 14 clinical trial registrations - these are ongoing. Participants had a history of acute myocardial infarction, revascularisation, or heart failure. Although there was little evidence of high risk of bias, a number of studies provided insufficient detail to enable assessment of potential risk of bias; in particular, details of generation and concealment of random allocation sequencing and blinding of outcome assessment were poorly reported. No evidence of a difference was seen between home- and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation in our primary outcomes up to 12 months of follow-up: total mortality (risk ratio [RR] = 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65 to 2.16; participants = 1647; studies = 12/comparisons = 14; low-certainty evidence) or exercise capacity (standardised mean difference (SMD) = -0.10, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.04; participants = 2343; studies = 24/comparisons = 28; low-certainty evidence). The majority of evidence (N=71 / 77 comparisons of either total or domain scores) showed no significant difference in health-related quality of life up to 24 months follow-up between home- and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation. Trials were generally of short duration, with only three studies reporting outcomes beyond 12 months (exercise capacity: SMD 0.11, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.23; participants = 1074; studies = 3; moderate-certainty evidence). There was a similar level of trial completion (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.08; participants = 2638; studies = 22/comparisons = 26; low-certainty evidence) between home-based and centre-based participants. The cost per patient of centre- and home-based programmes was similar.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This update supports previous conclusions that home- (± digital/telehealth platforms) and centre-based forms of cardiac rehabilitation formally supported by healthcare staff seem to be similarly effective in improving clinical and health-related quality of life outcomes in patients after myocardial infarction, or revascularisation, or with heart failure. This finding supports the continued expansion of healthcare professional supervised home-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes (± digital/telehealth platforms), especially important in the context of the ongoing global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic that has much limited patients in face-to-face access of hospital and community health services. Where settings are able to provide both supervised centre- and home-based programmes, consideration of the preference of the individual patient would seem appropriate. Although not included in the scope of this review, there is an increasing evidence base supporting the use of hybrid models that combine elements of both centre-based and home-based cardiac rehabilitation delivery. Further data are needed to determine: (1) whether the short-term effects of home/digital-telehealth and centre-based cardiac rehabilitation models of delivery can be confirmed in the longer term; (2) the relative clinical effectiveness and safety of home-based programmes for other heart patients, e.g. post-valve surgery and atrial fibrillation.

Telehealth in PM&R: Past, present, and future in clinical practice and opportunities for translational research

Telehealth refers to the use of telecommunication devices and other forms of technology to provide services outside of the traditional in-person health care delivery system. Growth in the use of telehealth creates new challenges and opportunities for implementation in clinical practice. The American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (AAPM&R) assembled an expert group to develop a white paper to examine telehealth innovation in Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (PM&R). The resultant white paper summarizes how telehealth is best used in the field of PM&R while highlighting current knowledge deficits and technological limitations. The report identifies new and transformative opportunities for PM&R to advance translational research related to telehealth and enhance patient care.

Optimal management of patients after acute coronary syndrome

Patients with clinically established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease are at a very high risk of recurrent cardiovascular events. An adequate management of risk factors and the implementation of healthy behaviours significantly decrease the risk of unfavourable clinical outcomes and future cardiovascular events, including death. Patients discharged after an acute coronary syndrome should be managed according to their individual risk level in order to ensure the appropriate treatment. Nevertheless, care pathways should also take into consideration the available resources and the logistical/structural aspects. In this setting, cardiac rehabilitation is prosed as a multidisciplinary approach to improving daily function and reducing cardiovascular risk factors. The organization of a network with the involvement of different medical and non-medical figures is essential to ensure successful outcomes and expected cost-effectiveness.

The Effect of Cardiac Rehabilitation on Lipid Levels in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a multidisciplinary medical program. Most studies have emphasized the effect of exercise-based CR in lowering lipid levels; however, the effect of CR as a comprehensive program on lipid levels remains unclear.

Methods

Electronic database were searched up to 2022. Randomized controlled trials with lipid profile indicators were included. Standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% CIs were used to evaluate the effect size. Begg's funnel plot and Egger's linear regression test were used to assess publication bias.

Results

CR remarkably reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (SMD = -0.23; 95%CI: [-0.38, -0.08]; P < 0.001), triglyceride (TG) levels (SMD = -0.17; 95%CI: [-0.28, -0.06]; P < 0.001), and total cholesterol (TC) levels (SMD = -0.30; 95%CI: [-0.43, -0.16]; P < 0.001) and increased high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels (SMD = 0.19; 95%CI: [0.10, 0.29]; P < 0.001).

Conclusions

CR reduce TC, TG, and LDL-C levels while improving HDL-C levels. CR should be promoted and more trials should be conducted for long-term CR.