A Randomized, Controlled, Crossover Trial of Virtual Reality in Maintenance Cardiovascular Rehabilitation in a Low-Resource Setting: Impact on Adherence, Motivation, and Engagement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of adding virtual reality (VR) to maintenance cardiac rehabilitation (CR); it was hypothesized VR would increase adherence, motivation, and engagement. METHODS: This study was a randomized, 1:1 concealed-allocation, single-blinded, 2 parallel-arm, crossover trial. Blinded assessments were undertaken at baseline (midprogram), 12 weeks, and 24 weeks after baseline. The setting was a single CR program of unlimited duration in Brazil. Participants were patients with cardiovascular diseases or risk factors who had been in the program for 3 months or longer. The CR program consisted of 3 supervised exercise sessions per week. In the VR arm, participants had 1 VR session of the 3 per week during the initial 12 weeks of the trial; this was withdrawn the subsequent 12 weeks. Measures were program adherence (% of 3 sessions/week over 12 weeks, ascertained in all participants), motivation (Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire 3), and engagement (User Engagement Scale, adapted; vigor, dedication, and absorption subscales); all 3 were primary outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty-one (83.6%) patients were randomly assigned (n = 30 to CR + VR); 54 (88.5%) were retained at 12 and 24 weeks. At baseline, participants had been in CR on average 7 years and had high engagement and motivation. CR + VR resulted in a significant increase in adherence at 12 weeks (baseline = 72.87%; 12 weeks = 82.80%), with significant reductions at 24 weeks when VR was withdrawn (65.48%); in the usual CR care arm, there were no changes over time. There was a significant effect for arm, with significantly higher adherence in the CR + VR arm than usual CR at 12 weeks (73.51%). Motivation decreased significantly from baseline to 12 weeks (4.32 [SD = 0.37] vs 4.02 [SD = 0.76]) and significantly increased from 12 to 24 weeks in the CR + VR arm (4.37 [SD = 0.36]). Absorption was significantly lower at 12 weeks in the CR + VR arm (6.79 [SD = 0.37] vs 6.20 [SD = 1.01]). CONCLUSION: Although VR increased program adherence, interspersing it with usual CR sessions actually decreased patient motivation and absorption. IMPACT: Supplementing a maintenance CR program with VR using "exergames" resulted in significantly greater adherence (8% increase or 3 of 36 sessions), and this was quite a robust effect given it was extinguished with the removal of VR. However, contrary to the hypotheses, offering 1 session of VR per week and 2 of usual CR exercise was related to lower motivation and absorption, which has implications for how clinicians design programs for this patient population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".