Comparison of patient characteristics and health outcomes between self-selected centre-based cardiac rehabilitation and hybrid cardiac telerehabilitation: a prospective cohort study
Authors' conclusion
Overall, hCTR attracted slightly younger patients with better baseline health, but both modalities showed similar effects on most health outcomes.
Study context
- Population
- Consecutive patients with CVD enrolled in a 3-month cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programme at a tertiary centre, May 2022–December 20231,292 screened
- Participants
- 406 patients
- Exposure
- Hybrid cardiac telerehabilitation vs centre-based CR
- Outcome
- Change in exercise capacity, anxiety, depression and hrQoL scores; achievement of BP, LDL-C and HbA1c (in DM) goals
- Follow-up
- Admission to discharge visit
Methodological detailssingle-centre (tertiary centre), self-selected modality by shared decision-making
- Single-centre (tertiary centre)
- Self-selected modality by shared decision-making
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
discharge visit
LDL-C Step I target achieved: Hybrid cardiac telerehabilitation (hCTR) vs centre-based CR (cbCR)
56 vs. 69%
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Baseline peak VO2 (% of predicted)
Baseline peak VO2 (% of predicted)
- hCTR 3 years younger, better health-related quality of life (hrQoL), lower depression and anxiety scores at baseline
Original publication
Comparison of patient characteristics and health outcomes between self-selected centre-based cardiac rehabilitation and hybrid cardiac telerehabilitation: a prospective cohort study. Eur J Prev Cardiol. Published 4 April 2025. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →