European journal of cardiovascular nursing · 2022
Relationship between physical capacity and depression in heart failure patients undergoing hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation vs. usual care: subanalysis from the TELEREH-HF Randomized Clinical Trial.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Piotrowicz Ewa, Mierzyńska Anna, Jaworska Izabela, Opolski Grzegorz, Banach Maciej, Zaręba Wojciech, Kowalik Ilona, Pencina Michael, Orzechowski Piotr, Szalewska Dominika, Pluta Sławomir, Glowczynska Renata, Kalarus Zbigniew, Irzmanski Robert, Piotrowicz Ryszard
Аннотация
AIMS: The hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation (HCTR) consisting of telecare (with psychological telesupport), telerehabilitation, and remote monitoring of cardiovascular implantable electronic devices might be an option to improve both physical capacity and depressive symptoms. The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of HCTR on depressive symptoms and physical capacity in heart failure (HF) patients in comparison with usual care (UC).
METHODS AND RESULTS: The present analysis formed part of a multicentre, randomized trial that enrolled 850 HF patients (New York Heart Association I-III, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%). Patients were randomized 1:1 to HCTR or UC. Patients underwent an HCTR programme (1 week in hospital and 8 weeks at home; exercise training 5 times weekly) or UC with observation. The Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II) score (cut point for depression ≥ 14) was used to assess depression and the physical capacity was measured by peak oxygen consumption (peak VO2; mL/kg/min). Measurements were made before and after 9-week intervention/observation (HCTR/UC group). Both groups were comparable in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics. In HCTR group, at entry, 23% of the sample obtained BDI-II scores ≥14 vs. 27.5% in UC group. There were no significant differences between groups regarding ΔBDI-II score (P = 0.992) after 9-week HCTR/UC. There was a significant improvement in physical capacity only in the HCTR group in both patients with (P = 0.033) and without (P < 0.001) depression.
CONCLUSIONS: In HF patients, HCTR provided similar reduction of depressive symptoms as UC. HCTR resulted in a significant improvement in physical capacity in patients with and without depression.
METHODS AND RESULTS: The present analysis formed part of a multicentre, randomized trial that enrolled 850 HF patients (New York Heart Association I-III, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 40%). Patients were randomized 1:1 to HCTR or UC. Patients underwent an HCTR programme (1 week in hospital and 8 weeks at home; exercise training 5 times weekly) or UC with observation. The Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI-II) score (cut point for depression ≥ 14) was used to assess depression and the physical capacity was measured by peak oxygen consumption (peak VO2; mL/kg/min). Measurements were made before and after 9-week intervention/observation (HCTR/UC group). Both groups were comparable in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics. In HCTR group, at entry, 23% of the sample obtained BDI-II scores ≥14 vs. 27.5% in UC group. There were no significant differences between groups regarding ΔBDI-II score (P = 0.992) after 9-week HCTR/UC. There was a significant improvement in physical capacity only in the HCTR group in both patients with (P = 0.033) and without (P < 0.001) depression.
CONCLUSIONS: In HF patients, HCTR provided similar reduction of depressive symptoms as UC. HCTR resulted in a significant improvement in physical capacity in patients with and without depression.