Design Requirements for Cardiac Telerehabilitation Technologies Supporting Athlete Values: Qualitative Interview Study.
Irina Bianca Șerban, Lonneke Fruytier, Steven Houben and 4 others
PMID 40245391WHAT IT FOUND
Athletes with heart disease rejected generic cardiac rehab as too easy and impersonal.
They wanted sport-specific intensity, hard data limits like max heart rate, and clinical validation of their wearables. They trusted face-to-face contact for safety but used remote monitoring for independence.
Key findings
01Athletes found standard cardiac rehab programs too easy and ineffective because they lacked the intensity and sport-specificity required for their fitness levels.
02Participants valued clear, quantifiable exercise limits (such as maximum heart rate) and clinical validation of wearable data over motivational tools or generic health advice.
03While open to remote monitoring for independence, athletes preferred face-to-face consultations for building trust and receiving emotional support, especially in the early post-hospitalization phase.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study included only Dutch participants from a single hospital, limiting generalizability to other cultures or healthcare systems. There was a severe gender imbalance: only 1 of the 15 athletes was female, meaning the findings largely reflect male perspectives. Participants were all highly active (exercising >4 hours/week), so the results may not apply to less active patients with cardiac conditions. The study identifies design requirements and user preferences; it does not test whether these requirements actually improve clinical outcomes or safety.
Declared interests
None declared.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that highly active patients do not need supervision. While they may reject motivational tools and generic education, they often require more precise clinical oversight regarding intensity limits and data validation than sedentary patients to safely return to sport.