Group-based cardiac telerehabilitation interventions and health outcomes in coronary patients: A scoping review.
Renuka J Jacobsson, Anne Oikarinen, Jenni Krogell and 1 others
PMID 37731365WHAT IT FOUND
Group-based cardiac telerehabilitation often improved physical fitness and social support, but showed no significant change in quality of life or traditional risk factors.
Evidence is limited by small sample sizes and short follow-up periods, meaning long-term health benefits remain unproven.
Key findings
01Physical fitness increased in eight of the nine studies that measured it, with improvements seen in oxygen uptake, walking distance, and muscle strength.
02None of the seven studies measuring health-related quality of life found significant differences between the intervention and control groups.
03Social support and peer interaction improved, particularly for patients who were geographically isolated or unable to access clinical facilities.
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 included studies had small sample sizes, with most having fewer than 50 patients. Follow-up periods were generally short, with most studies measuring outcomes at 6 to 12 weeks, limiting knowledge of long-term effects. The review is a scoping review, meaning it maps the evidence but does not assess the quality of the individual studies or provide a pooled effect size. Risk factors and lifestyle changes were often not comprehensively measured at follow-up, making it difficult to assess true clinical impact.
Declared interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest. The work was supported by the Central Finland Heart Association.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret the improvements in physical fitness as evidence that these programs reduce cardiovascular risk or mortality. The review found no significant changes in traditional risk factors or quality of life, and the evidence base is limited by small, short-term studies.