METHODS: This study was a two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial. Twenty-eight patients with coronary heart disease were randomly assigned to either the intervention group, receiving a 12-week technology-assisted intervention (n = 14), or the control group (n = 14), receiving usual care. Guided by the Health Belief Model, the intervention group received three center-based, supervised exercise training sessions, a fitness watch that served as a cue to action, six educational videos, and a weekly video call. The Self-efficacy for Exercise, exercise capacity, and Health Promoting Lifestyle Profile II were assessed at baseline and immediately post-intervention (12-weeks).
RESULTS: Among the 28 patients who participated in this study, 85.7% completed the program, with a relatively low attrition rate (14.3%). The number of exercise training sessions accomplished by the participants in the intervention group was 51.27 ± 19.41 out of 60 sessions (85.5%) compared to 36.46 ± 23.05 (60.8%) in the control group. No cardiac adverse events or hospitalizations were reported throughout the study. Participants in the intervention group showed greater improvement in health-promoting behaviors when compared with the control group at 12 weeks. Within-group effects demonstrated improvement in exercise self-efficacy and exercise capacity among participants in the intervention group. A participant satisfaction survey conducted immediately post-intervention revealed that participants were "very satisfied" (23.1%) and "satisfied" (76.9%) with the technology-assisted intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings demonstrated that technology-assisted intervention in a hybrid cardiac rehabilitation program was feasible and suggested to be beneficial in improving exercise self-efficacy, exercise capacity, and health promoting behavior among patients with coronary heart disease. A full-scale study is needed to determine its effectiveness in the long term.
TRIAL AND PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04862351. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04862351.
METHODS: This was a single-blinded, randomized control trial involving 34 subjects between the age of 45-70 years (58.41±5.93) comparing retro-walking (RW) to forward-walking (FW). Subjects were randomly allocated to receive either RW with structured resistance training (SRT) or FW with SRT; 3 times a week for 12 weeks. The symptoms, pain, and function of daily living sub scores of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) along with Timed up and go (TUG) and Chair stand test (CST) were assessed at baseline and after 12 weeks. The outcomes were analyzed with two-way repeated measure analysis of variance.
RESULTS: Significant improvements for all outcomes were observed intra-group (P value <0.05) after 12 weeks. The KOOS sub scores, TUG and CST times was not statistically significant between study groups (P value >0.05). However, the partial eta squared scores for all outcomes were better in the RW group compared to FW except for CST.
CONCLUSIONS: It can be concluded that RW is a feasible and non-inferior option to FW in the rehabilitation of subjects with bilateral knee OA.
BACKGROUND: Despite efforts to promote utilisation of cardiac rehabilitation (CR), participation among patients remains unsatisfactory. Little is known of patient decision to participate Phase II CR in a multi-ethnic country.
DESIGN: A cross-sectional study design.
METHODS: A consecutive sampling of 240 patients with coronary heart disease completed Coronary Artery Disease Education Questionnaire (CADE-Q) II, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (MSPSS) and Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale (CRBS).
RESULTS: Seventy per cent of patients (mean age 60.5 [SD = 10.6] years, 80.8% male) participated in phase II cardiac rehabilitation. Self-driving to cardiac rehabilitation centres, higher barriers in perceived need/health care and logistical factors were significantly associated with decreased odds of participation. Patients with more barriers from comorbidities/functional status, higher perceived social support from friends, and anxiety were more likely to participate. Chinese and Indians were less likely to participate when compared with Malays. More than 80% of patients used both home and mobile broadband internet, and 72.9% of them would accept the usage of technologies, especially educational videos, instant messenger, and video calls to partially replace the face-to-face, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation approach.
CONCLUSION: Several barriers were associated with non-participation in phase II cardiac rehabilitation. With the high perceived acceptance of technology usage in cardiac rehabilitation, home-based and hybrid cardiac rehabilitation may represent potential solutions to improve participation.
RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: By addressing the barriers to cardiac rehabilitation, patients are more likely to be ready to adopt health behaviour changes and adhere to the cardiac rehabilitation programme. The high perceived acceptance of using technologies in cardiac rehabilitation may provide insights into new delivery models that can improve and overcome barriers to participation.
METHODS: We recruited patients with CRDs from two hospitals in Klang Valley, Malaysia to a home-PR programme. Following centre-based assessment, patients performed the exercises at home (five sessions/week for eight weeks (total 40 sessions)). We monitored the patients via weekly telephone calls and asked about adherence to the programme. We measured functional exercise capacity (6-Minutes Walking Test (6MWT) and Health-Related Quality-of-Life (HRQoL) (COPD Assessment Test (CAT)) at baseline and post-PR at nine weeks. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 purposively sampled participants to explore views and feedback on the home-PR programme. The interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed thematically.
RESULTS: We included 30 participants; two withdrew due to hospitalisation. Although 28 (93%) adhered to the full programme, only 11 (37%) attended the post-PR assessment because COVID-19 movement restrictions in Malaysia at that time prevented attendance at the centre. Four themes emerged from the qualitative analysis: involvement of family and caregivers, barriers to home-PR programme, interactions with peers and health care professionals, and programme enhancement.
CONCLUSION: Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, the home-PR programme proved feasible for remote delivery, although centre-based post-PR assessments were not possible. Family involvement played an important role in the home-PR programme. The delivery of this programme can be further improved to maximise the benefit for patients.
OBJECTIVES: To describe the effects of electrical stimulation (ES) therapy in the 4-week management of two sub-acute spinal cord-injured (SCI) individuals (C7 American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) B and T9 AIS (B)).
SETTING: University Malaya Medical Centre, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
METHODS: A diagnostic tilt-table test was conducted to confirm the presence of orthostatic hypotension (OH) based on the current clinical definitions. Following initial assessment, subjects underwent 4 weeks of ES therapy 4 times weekly for 1 h per day. Post-tests tilt table challenge, both with and without ES on their rectus abdominis, quadriceps, hamstrings and gastrocnemius muscles, was conducted at the end of the study (week 5). Subjects' blood pressures (BP) and heart rates (HR) were recorded every minute during pre-test and post-tests. Orthostatic symptoms, as well as the maximum tolerance time that the subjects could withstand head up tilt at 60°, were recorded.
RESULTS: Subject A improved his orthostatic symptoms, but did not recover from clinically defined OH based on the 20-min duration requirement. With concurrent ES therapy, 60° head up tilt BP was 89/62 mm Hg compared with baseline BP of 115/71 mm Hg. Subject B fully recovered from OH demonstrated by BP of 105/71 mm Hg during the 60° head up tilt compared with baseline BP of 124/77 mm Hg. Both patients demonstrated longer tolerance time during head up tilt with concomitant ES (subject A: pre-test 4 min, post-test without ES 6 min, post-test with ES 12 min; subject B: pre-test 4 min, post-test without ES 28 min, post-test with ES 60 min).
CONCLUSIONS: Weekly ES therapy had positive effect on OH management in sub-acute SCI individuals.
METHODS: Fifty-one participants performed the standard incremental treadmill exercise in a controlled laboratory setting with 12-lead ECG attached to the patient's body and wearing wrist-worn PPG trackers.
RESULTS: At each stage, the absolute percentage error of the PPG was within 10% of the standard acceptable range. Further analysis using a linear mixed model, which accounts for individual variations, revealed that PPG yielded the best performance at the baseline low-intensity exercise. As the stages progressed, heart rate validity decreased but was regained during recovery. The reliability was moderate to excellent.
CONCLUSIONS: Low-cost trackers AMAZFIT Cor and Bip validity and reliability were within acceptable ranges, especially during low-intensity exercise among patients with ischemic heart disease recovering from cardiac procedures. Though using the tracker as part of the diagnosis tool still requires more supporting studies, it can potentially be used as a self-monitoring tool with precautions.
METHODS: A pilot cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) with qualitative interviews was conducted. Each primary care doctor was considered a cluster and randomized to either the control (usual practice) or intervention (DeSSBack) group. Patient outcomes including Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and a 10-point pain rating scale were measured at baseline and 2-month postintervention. The doctors in the intervention group were interviewed to explore feasibility and acceptability of using DeSSBack.
RESULTS: Thirty-six patients with nonspecific LBP participated in this study (intervention n = 23; control n = 13). Fidelity was poor among patients but good among doctors. The RMDQ and anxiety score had medium effect sizes of 0.718 and 0.480, respectively. The effect sizes for pain score (0.070) and depression score were small (0.087). There was appreciable acceptability and satisfaction with use of DeSSBack, as it was helpful in facilitating thorough and standardized management, providing appropriate treatment plans based on risk stratification, improving consultation time, empowering patient-centred care, and easy to use.
CONCLUSIONS: A future cRCT to evaluate the effectiveness of DeSSBack is feasible to be conducted in a primary care setting with minor modifications. DeSSBack was found useful by doctors and can be improved to enhance efficiency.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol of the cluster randomized controlled trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04959669).