RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Restrictions on face-to-face contact, due to COVID-19, led to a rapid adoption of technology to remotely deliver cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Some technologies, including Active+me, were used without knowing their benefits. We assessed changes in patient activation measure (PAM) in patients participating in routine CR, using Active+me. We also investigated changes in PAM among low, moderate, and high risk patients, changes in cardiovascular risk factors, and explored patient and healthcare professional experiences of using Active+me. METHODS: Patients received standard CR education and an exercise prescription. Active+me was used to monitor patient health, progress towards goals, and provide additional lifestyle support. Patients accessed Active+me through a smart-device application which synchronised to telemetry enabled scales, blood pressure monitors, pulse oximeter, and activity trackers. Changes in PAM score following CR were calculated. Sub-group analysis was conducted on patients at high, moderate, and low risk of exercise induced cardiovascular events. Qualitative interviews explored the acceptability of Active+me. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were recruited (Age: 60.4 ± 10.9 years; BMI: 27.9 ± 5.0 kg.m2; 78.3% male). PAM scores increased from 65.5 (range: 51.0 to 100.0) to 70.2 (range: 40.7 to 100.0; P = 0.039). PAM scores of high risk patients increased from 61.9 (range: 53.0 to 91.0) to 75.0 (range: 58.1 to 100.0; P = 0.044). The PAM scores of moderate and low risk patients did not change. Resting systolic blood pressure decreased from 125 mmHg (95% CI: 120 to 130 mmHg) to 119 mmHg (95% CI: 115 to 122 mmHg; P = 0.023) and waist circumference measurements decreased from 92.8 cm (95% CI: 82.6 to 102.9 cm) to 85.3 cm (95% CI 79.1 to 96.2 cm; P = 0.026). Self-reported physical activity levels increased from 1557.5 MET-minutes (range: 245.0 to 5355.0 MET-minutes) to 3363.2 MET-minutes (range: 105.0 to 12,360.0 MET-minutes; P < 0.001). Active+me was acceptable to patients and healthcare professionals. CONCLUSION: Participation in standard CR, with Active+me, is associated with increased patient skill, knowledge, and confidence to manage their condition. Active+me may be an appropriate platform to support CR delivery when patients cannot be seen face-to-face. TRIAL REGISTRATION: As this was not a clinical trial, the study was not registered in a trial registry.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Reabilitação Cardíaca , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Pandemias , Participação do Paciente , SARS-CoV-2Assuntos
Serviços de Saúde Comunitária/métodos , Terapia por Exercício/métodos , Exercício Físico/fisiologia , Promoção da Saúde/métodos , Neoplasias/fisiopatologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Neoplasias/epidemiologia , Qualidade de Vida , Inquéritos e Questionários , Reino Unido/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Approximately 3 million people in the United Kingdom are currently living with or beyond cancer. People undergoing treatment for cancer are at risk of complications following treatment. Increasing evidence supports the role of rehabilitation (including prehabilitation) in enhancing psychological and physical well-being in patients with cancer and improving outcomes. Active Together is an evidence-based, multimodal rehabilitation service for patients with cancer, providing support to help patients prepare for and recover from treatment. This paper presents the evaluation protocol for the Active Together service, aiming to determine its impact on patient-reported outcomes and clinical endpoints, as well as understand processes and mechanisms that influence its delivery and outcomes. METHODS: This evaluation comprises an outcome and process evaluation, with service implementation data integrated into the analysis of outcome measures. The outcome evaluation will assess changes in outcomes of patients that attend the service and compare health care resource use against historical data. The process evaluation will use performance indicators, semistructured interviews, and focus groups to explore mechanisms of action and contextual factors influencing delivery and outcomes. Integrating psychological change mechanisms with outcome data might help to clarify complex causal pathways within the service. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence to support the role of multimodal rehabilitation before, during, and after cancer treatment is increasing. The translation of that evidence into practice is less advanced. Findings from this evaluation will contribute to our understanding of the real-world impact of cancer rehabilitation and strengthen the case for widespread adoption of rehabilitation into routine care for people with cancer.