Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2018
End Users Want Alternative Intervention Delivery Models: Usability and Acceptability of the REMOTE-CR Exercise-Based Cardiac Telerehabilitation Program.
Equivalence TrialСтатьяРандомизированное 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.
Rawstorn Jonathan C, Gant Nicholas, Rolleston Anna, Whittaker Robyn, Stewart Ralph, Benatar Jocelyn, Warren Ian, Meads Andrew, Jiang Yannan, Maddison Ralph
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate user experiences of an exercise-based cardiac telerehabilitation intervention (REMOTE-CR) that provided near universal access to real-time remote coaching and behavioral support from exercise specialists.
DESIGN: Secondary analysis (12-week follow-up) of a parallel group, single blind, randomized controlled noninferiority trial (ACTRN12614000843651).
SETTING: Community-based cardiac rehabilitation.
PARTICIPANTS: Adults (N=162) with coronary heart disease who were eligible for outpatient cardiac rehabilitation. Eighty-two of 162 trial participants were randomized to receive REMOTE-CR; 67 completed usability and acceptability assessment at 12-week follow-up.
INTERVENTION: REMOTE-CR comprised 12 weeks of individualized exercise prescription, real-time physiological monitoring, coaching, and behavioral support, delivered via a bespoke telerehabilitation platform.
OUTCOMES: Ease of use, satisfaction with the technology platform and intervention content, and demand for real-world implementation as an alternative to traditional center-based programs were assessed at 12-week follow-up.
RESULTS: Components of usability and acceptability were positively evaluated by most participants (44-66 of 67, 66%-99%). Fifty-eight of 67 (87%) would choose REMOTE-CR if it was available as a usual care service, primarily because it provides convenient and flexible access to real-time individualized support from exercise specialists. Technology challenges were rare and had little effect on user experiences or demand for REMOTE-CR.
CONCLUSIONS: REMOTE-CR can extend the reach and impact of existing cardiac rehabilitation services by overcoming traditional participation barriers while preserving expert oversight. Adoption of emerging technologies should be accelerated to support dynamic, engaging, individualized intervention delivery models, but optimizing overall cardiac rehabilitation participation rates will require multiple delivery models that are tailored to satisfy diverse participant preferences.
DESIGN: Secondary analysis (12-week follow-up) of a parallel group, single blind, randomized controlled noninferiority trial (ACTRN12614000843651).
SETTING: Community-based cardiac rehabilitation.
PARTICIPANTS: Adults (N=162) with coronary heart disease who were eligible for outpatient cardiac rehabilitation. Eighty-two of 162 trial participants were randomized to receive REMOTE-CR; 67 completed usability and acceptability assessment at 12-week follow-up.
INTERVENTION: REMOTE-CR comprised 12 weeks of individualized exercise prescription, real-time physiological monitoring, coaching, and behavioral support, delivered via a bespoke telerehabilitation platform.
OUTCOMES: Ease of use, satisfaction with the technology platform and intervention content, and demand for real-world implementation as an alternative to traditional center-based programs were assessed at 12-week follow-up.
RESULTS: Components of usability and acceptability were positively evaluated by most participants (44-66 of 67, 66%-99%). Fifty-eight of 67 (87%) would choose REMOTE-CR if it was available as a usual care service, primarily because it provides convenient and flexible access to real-time individualized support from exercise specialists. Technology challenges were rare and had little effect on user experiences or demand for REMOTE-CR.
CONCLUSIONS: REMOTE-CR can extend the reach and impact of existing cardiac rehabilitation services by overcoming traditional participation barriers while preserving expert oversight. Adoption of emerging technologies should be accelerated to support dynamic, engaging, individualized intervention delivery models, but optimizing overall cardiac rehabilitation participation rates will require multiple delivery models that are tailored to satisfy diverse participant preferences.