Heart rhythm O2 · 2024
Integrating the quantitative with the qualitative: findings from a mixed methods cardiac rehabilitation exercise trial.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Giggins Oonagh M, Cullen-Smith Suzanne, Kenny Eanna, Doyle Julie
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Cardiac rehabilitation is a core component of cardiovascular disease management. Eastern Corridor Medical Engineering-Cardiac Rehabilitation is a digital health platform for online cardiac rehabilitation exercise. We conducted a mixed methods pilot trial to evaluate Eastern Corridor Medical Engineering-Cardiac Rehabilitation.
OBJECTIVE: The study sought to examine the difference between objectively measured outcomes and participant perceptions of benefits and improvements gained from participation in a cardiac rehabilitation exercise program.
METHODS: Seventeen participants (14 male, 3 female; 69.5 ± 7.3 years of age) took part and were allocated to 1 of 2 groups; an online exercise group (n = 8), or an in-person exercise (n = 9) group. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, a pragmatic approach to group allocation was adopted. Objective outcomes were assessed at baseline and repeated following the intervention period, with the primary outcome being 6-minute walk test distance. In addition to clinical outcome measurements, we undertook qualitative interviews with participants.
RESULTS: Only 5 participants demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in 6-minute walk test distance, following the 8-week exercise program. The main theme emerging from the qualitative interviews was the valued benefits of the cardiac rehabilitation exercise program. Despite the lack of measurable physical change, participants self-defined a range of benefits they valued and attributed directly to participation in the cardiac rehabilitation exercise program.
CONCLUSION: The findings from this study may offer a useful starting point for further study of community-based cardiac rehabilitation exercise and also highlight the benefit of adopting a mixed methods approach that considers both the objective outcomes measured as well as the subjective reports obtained from participants.
OBJECTIVE: The study sought to examine the difference between objectively measured outcomes and participant perceptions of benefits and improvements gained from participation in a cardiac rehabilitation exercise program.
METHODS: Seventeen participants (14 male, 3 female; 69.5 ± 7.3 years of age) took part and were allocated to 1 of 2 groups; an online exercise group (n = 8), or an in-person exercise (n = 9) group. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, a pragmatic approach to group allocation was adopted. Objective outcomes were assessed at baseline and repeated following the intervention period, with the primary outcome being 6-minute walk test distance. In addition to clinical outcome measurements, we undertook qualitative interviews with participants.
RESULTS: Only 5 participants demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in 6-minute walk test distance, following the 8-week exercise program. The main theme emerging from the qualitative interviews was the valued benefits of the cardiac rehabilitation exercise program. Despite the lack of measurable physical change, participants self-defined a range of benefits they valued and attributed directly to participation in the cardiac rehabilitation exercise program.
CONCLUSION: The findings from this study may offer a useful starting point for further study of community-based cardiac rehabilitation exercise and also highlight the benefit of adopting a mixed methods approach that considers both the objective outcomes measured as well as the subjective reports obtained from participants.