Virtual cardiac rehabilitation: A rapid shift in care delivery in response to the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cardiac rehabilitation is an integral part of recovery from a critical cardiac life event. This preventative strategy involves exercise rehabilitation, education, lifestyle modification, and self-management coaching – preparing patients for lifelong changes. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, these activities were supervised by clinicians in-person, on hospital grounds, and in large groups. However, due to pandemic regulations in Canada imposed in March 2020, all in-person group activities were restricted. Within the first two months of the pandemic, almost half of cardiac rehabilitation services in Canada closed and half of their employees were deployed to other areas. To continue to provide patient care and ensure high-quality patient experience and recovery, cardiac rehabilitation services in Fraser Health, British Columbia rapidly transitioned to exclusively virtual methods of care delivery. Two years later, we are still providing this virtual model of care. This case study reflects on the experience of virtual care delivery of cardiac rehabilitation by participants and health providers. It outlines the process, the challenges, and the outcomes experienced with shifting to a new standard of care. The virtual participation rates showed a slight increase, with a significant reduction in time to access care, and increased adherence to the rehabilitation program. Overall patient satisfaction and provider experience continue to be positive. The consensus is that cardiac rehabilitation should not be optional, even during a global crisis. Experience Framework This article is associated with the Innovation & Technology lens of The Beryl Institute Experience Framework (https://www.theberylinstitute.org/ExperienceFramework). Access other PXJ articles related to this lens. Access other resources related to this lens
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".