Journal of cardiopulmonary rehabilitation and prevention · 2026
Efficacy of Home-Based Telerehabilitation Versus Center-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation on Cardiopulmonary Function and Exercise Capacity in Patients After Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Liu Huili, Wang Xugang, Wang Cuihua, Kong Manman, Ma Jingjing, Liu Yan
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The objective is to compare the effects of a home-based telerehabilitation (HBTCR) program, traditional center-based cardiac rehabilitation (CBCR), and usual care on cardiopulmonary function and exercise capacity in patients after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).
METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, 111 patients, 4 to 8 weeks after CABG surgery, were assigned to 12 weeks of HBTCR (n = 37), CBCR (n = 37), or to a control group (n = 37). The HBTCR group utilized wearable sensors and a mobile app for remote monitoring and coaching. The CBCR group underwent supervised on-site sessions. Primary outcomes were changes in peak oxygen uptake () and 6-minute walk distance. Secondary outcomes included left ventricular ejection fraction, psychological status, and quality of life.
RESULTS: Among 101 completers, both HBTCR and CBCR groups showed significant improvements in (HBTCR: +5.1; CBCR: +4.8 mL/kg/min) and 6-minute walk distance (HBTCR: +85.2 m; CBCR: +81.5 m) versus control (P < .001), with no difference between interventions. Significant improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction, psychological scores, and quality of life were also observed in both intervention groups compared with control (P < .05). Adherence was high (HBTCR: 92.1%; CBCR: 85.3%) with no major adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that an HBTCR program has similar efficacy as CBCR in improving cardiopulmonary function, exercise capacity, and patient-centered outcomes after CABG. An HBTCR program represents a viable, accessible alternative model for delivering comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention.
METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, 111 patients, 4 to 8 weeks after CABG surgery, were assigned to 12 weeks of HBTCR (n = 37), CBCR (n = 37), or to a control group (n = 37). The HBTCR group utilized wearable sensors and a mobile app for remote monitoring and coaching. The CBCR group underwent supervised on-site sessions. Primary outcomes were changes in peak oxygen uptake () and 6-minute walk distance. Secondary outcomes included left ventricular ejection fraction, psychological status, and quality of life.
RESULTS: Among 101 completers, both HBTCR and CBCR groups showed significant improvements in (HBTCR: +5.1; CBCR: +4.8 mL/kg/min) and 6-minute walk distance (HBTCR: +85.2 m; CBCR: +81.5 m) versus control (P < .001), with no difference between interventions. Significant improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction, psychological scores, and quality of life were also observed in both intervention groups compared with control (P < .05). Adherence was high (HBTCR: 92.1%; CBCR: 85.3%) with no major adverse events.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that an HBTCR program has similar efficacy as CBCR in improving cardiopulmonary function, exercise capacity, and patient-centered outcomes after CABG. An HBTCR program represents a viable, accessible alternative model for delivering comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention.