Dataset Information

An aetiology-based subanalysis of the Telerehabilitation in Heart Failure Patients (TELEREH-HF) trial.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

The aim of our study was to analyse the benefits of a 9 week hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation (HCTR) programme in heart failure (HF) patients according to aetiology, as a subanalysis of the Telerehabilitation in Heart Failure Patients (TELEREH-HF) trial.

Methods and results

Overall, 555 (65.3%) patients with ischaemic (IS) and 295 (34.7%) patients with non-ischaemic (NIS) HF aetiology were randomized. There were no differences between the effect of HCTR and usual care (UC) on the primary outcome of number of days alive and out of the hospital in 26 months from the time of randomization in either aetiology (Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test), and no heterogeneity of effect between the aetiologies was noted (van Elteren test, P = 0.746). In Cox proportional hazards regression analysis, treatment was not independently associated with the secondary outcomes. For all-cause mortality, the adjusted hazard ratio for HCTR vs. UC was 0.90 (95% confidence interval, 0.54-1.51) in IS and 1.42 (95% confidence interval, 0.69-2.94) in NIS (P interaction = 0.316). Differences between HCTR and UC in terms of change in the 6 min walk test distance and cardiopulmonary exercise test time after 9 weeks reached statistical significance in the IS arm (P = 0.015 and P < 0.001, respectively), but not in the NIS arm; however, tests of heterogeneity indicated no statistically significant differences.

Conclusions

The trial showed no difference between HCTR and UC in the primary outcome of percentage of days alive and out of the hospital for either IS or NIS aetiology. Moreover, the magnitude of changes in the clinical and functional statuses of the HF patients did not differ by aetiology. HCTR might have had beneficial effects on the 6 min walk test distance and cardiopulmonary exercise test time after 9 weeks in the IS patients; however, the effect was not statistically significantly different from that observed in the NIS patients.

SUBMITTER: Szalewska D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8006702 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundType 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the most common comorbidities among patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). There are limited data regarding efficacy of hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation (HCTR) on cardiopulmonary exercise capacity in patients with HFrEF with versus those without diabetes.AimThe aim of the present study was to analyze effects of 9-week HCTR in comparison to usual care on parameters of cardiopulmonary exercise capacity in HF patients according to history of DM.MethodsClinically stable HF patients with left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] < 40% after a hospitalization due to worsening HF within past 6 months were enrolled in the TELEREH-HF (The TELEREHabilitation in Heart Failure Patients) trial and randomized to the HCTR or usual care (UC). Cardiopulmonary exercise tests (CPET) were performed on treadmill with an incremental workload according to the ramp protocol.ResultsCPET was performed in 385 patients assigned to HCTR group: 129 (33.5%) had DM (HCTR-DM group) and 256 patients (66.5%) did not have DM (HCTR-nonDM group). Among 397 patients assigned to UC group who had CPET: 137 (34.5%) had DM (UC-DM group) and 260 patients (65.5%) did not have DM (UC-nonDM group). Among DM patients, differences in cardiopulmonary parameters from baseline to 9 weeks remained similar among HCTR and UC patients. In contrast, among patients without DM, HCTR was associated with greater 9-week changes than UC in exercise time, which resulted in a statistically significant interaction between patients with and without DM: difference in changes in exercise time between HCTR versus UC was 12.0 s [95% CI - 15.1, 39.1 s] in DM and 43.1 s [95% CI 24.0, 63.0 s] in non-DM, interaction p-value = 0.016. Furthermore, statistically significant differences in the effect of HCTR versus UC between DM and non-DM were observed in ventilation at rest: - 0.34 l/min [95% CI - 1.60, 0.91 l/min] in DM and 0.83 l/min [95% CI - 0.06, 1.73 l/min] in non-DM, interaction p value = 0.0496 and in VE/VCO2 slope: 1.52 [95% CI - 1.55, 4.59] for DM vs. - 1.44 [95% CI - 3.64, 0.77] for non-DM, interaction p value = 0.044.ConclusionsThe benefits of hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation versus usual care on the improvement of physical performance, ventilatory profile and gas exchange parameters were more pronounced in patients with HFrEF without DM as compared to patients with DM.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02523560. Registered 3rd August 2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02523560?term=NCT02523560&draw=2&rank=1 . Other Study ID Numbers: STRATEGME1/233547/13/NCBR/2015.

Project description:ImportanceGuidelines recommend exercise training as a component of heart failure management. There are large disparities in access to rehabilitation, and introducing hybrid comprehensive telerehabilitation (HCTR) consisting of remote monitoring of training at patients' homes might be an appealing alternative.ObjectiveTo assess whether potential improvements in quality-of-life outcomes after a 9-week HCTR intervention in patients with heart failure translate into improvement in clinical outcomes during extended 12 to 24 months of follow-up, compared with usual care.Design, setting, and participantsThe Telerehabilitation in Heart Failure Patients (TELEREH-HF) trial is a multicenter, prospective, open-label, parallel-group randomized clinical trial that enrolled 850 patients with heart failure up to 6 months after a cardiovascular hospitalization with New York Heart Association levels I, II, or III and left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or less. Patients from 5 centers in Poland were randomized 1:1 to HCTR plus usual care or usual care only and followed up for 14 to 26 months after randomization.InterventionsDuring the first 9 weeks, patients underwent either an HCTR program (1 week in hospital and 8 weeks at home) or usual care with observation. The HCTR intervention encompassed telecare, telerehabilitation, and remote monitoring of implantable devices. No intervention occurred in the remaining study period.Main outcomes and measuresThe percentage of days alive and out of the hospital from randomization through the end of follow-up at 14 to 26 months.ResultsA total of 850 patients were enrolled, with 425 randomized to the HCTR group (377 male patients [88.7%]; mean [SD] age, 62.6 [10.8] years) and 425 randomized to usual care (376 male patients [88.5%]; mean [SD] age, 62.2 [10.2] years). The HCTR intervention did not extend the percentage of days alive and out of the hospital. The mean (SD) days were 91.9 (19.3) days in the HCTR group vs 92.8 (18.3) days in the usual-care group, with the probability that HCTR extends days alive and out of the hospital equal to 0.49 (95% CI, 0.46-0.53; P = .74) vs usual care. During follow-up, 54 patients died in the HCTR arm and 52 in the usual-care arm, with mortality rates at 26 months of 12.5% vs 12.4%, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.70-1.51]). There were also no differences in hospitalization rates (hazard ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.79-1.13]). The HCTR intervention was effective at 9 weeks, significantly improving peak oxygen consumption (0.95 [95% CI, 0.65-1.26] mL/kg/min vs 0.00 [95% CI, -0.31 to 0.30] mL/kg/min; P < .001) and quality of life (Medical Outcome Survey Short Form-36 questionnaire score, 1.58 [95% CI, 0.74-2.42] vs 0.00 [95% CI, -0.84 to 0.84]; P = .008), and it was well tolerated, with no serious adverse events during exercise.Conclusions and relevanceIn this trial, the positive effects of a 9-week program of HCTR in patients with heart failure did not lead to the increase in percentage of days alive and out of the hospital and did not reduce mortality and hospitalization over a follow-up period of 14 to 26 months.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02523560.

Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality worldwide, accounting for 13%-15% of all deaths. Cardiac rehabilitation has poor compliance and adherence. Telerehabilitation has been introduced to increase patients' participation, access, and adherence with the help of digital technologies. The target group is patients with heart failure. A telerehabilitation program called "Future Patient" has been developed and consists of three phases: (1) titration of medicine (0-3 months), (2) implementation of the telerehabilitation protocols (3 months), and (3) follow-up with rehabilitation in everyday life (6 months). Patients in the Future Patient program measure their blood pressure, pulse, weight, number of steps taken, sleep, and respiration and answer questions online regarding their well-being. All data are transmitted and accessed in the HeartPortal by patients and health care professionals.ObjectiveThe aim of this paper is to describe the research design, outcome measures, and data collection techniques in the clinical test of the Future Patient Telerehabilitation Program for patients with heart failure.MethodsA randomized controlled study will be performed. The intervention group will follow the Future Patient Telerehabilitation program, and the control group will follow the traditional cardiac rehabilitation program. The primary outcome is quality of life measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes are development of clinical data; illness perception; motivation; anxiety and depression; health and electronic health literacy; qualitative exploration of patients', spouses', and health care professionals' experiences of participating in the telerehabilitation program; and a health economy evaluation of the program. Outcomes were assessed using questionnaires and through the data generated by digital technologies.ResultsData collection began in December 2016 and will be completed in October 2019. The study results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences. Results from the Future Patient Telerehabilitation program are expected to be published by the spring of 2020.ConclusionsThe expected outcomes are increased quality of life, increased motivation and illness perception, reduced anxiety and depressions, improved electronic health literacy, and health economics benefits. We expect the study to have a clinical impact for future telerehabilitation of patients with heart failure.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03388918; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03388918.International registered report identifier (irrid)DERR1-10.2196/14517.