MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280643709 · doi:10.1093/eurjpc/zwac056.221

Virtual cardiac rehabilitation during the COVID-19 pandemic: a tertiary site experience

2022· article· en· W4280643709 on OpenAlexaff
Nathaniel Moulson, Jamie Robinson, Sum Chan, D. Cuff, Andrew Ignaszewski, S. Isserow, Brenda Lau, N Ordano, L. Sung, J Werry, Curtis R. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Preventive Cardiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Health and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyPopulationRehabilitationTest (biology)Physical therapyPandemicCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Internal medicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Public Institution(s). Main funding source(s): University of British Columbia Clinician Investigator Program Background The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the abrupt suspension of centre-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR). Multidisciplinary virtual CR (VCR) with the use of digital, telephone, and video communication was implemented for continued care access. Exercise therapy was delivered through synchronous video-supervised sessions, pre-recorded sessions, and self-directed physical activity. Purpose To describe patient characteristics, completion rates, and safety outcomes in a real-world VCR population. Methods Prospective observational study of a tertiary academic CR program. VCR was implemented at pandemic onset (March 2020). Patients who were enrolled in, and either completed or dropped out, during the study period were included. Completers were defined as completing 6 months of virtual enrolment and an exit assessment. Risk was defined by the AACPVR 2020 risk categorization. Adverse cardiovascular events were defined as a patient-initiated event requiring medical assessment and stratified as exercise or non-exercise related. Continuous variables are presented as means and SD or medians and IQR. Student’s t-test was used for between group comparisons. Categorical variables are presented as n (%) and compared using the χ2 test or Fischer’s exact test. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant. Results Between March 13th, 2020, and August 31st, 2021, 222 [mean age 61.8 years (SD, 12.6) 77% male], were enrolled and discharged from the VCR program (Table 1). There were 160 completers and 62 non-completers (completion rate 72%). Among the non-completers 26 attended the MD intake assessment only. The remaining 36 completed a median of 85 days (IQR 25-197). This cohort included 21 (9%) high-risk and 35 (16%) moderate risk patients. Those at moderate risk were more likely to be non-completers and those at low risk were more likely to be completers (Table 1). Two exercise and 17 non-exercise adverse events were observed (median clinical surveillance 217 days [IQR 205-240]) (Table 2). Exercise related adverse events included neurally mediated syncope during a synchronous video exercise session in a low risk patient. This was responded to as per centre developed virtual safety protocols. A second syncope related to heart block occurred in a moderate risk patient during independent physical activity and required permanent pacemaker insertion. Both patients completed the program. Three non-exercise adverse cardiac events resulted in cessation of participation included one death and two heart failure hospitalizations (Table 2). One stroke and 13 emergency department visits for cardiac symptoms occurred in completers. Conclusion Real world VCR is feasible, including in those at moderate to high risk. Modest completion rates and a low exercise related adverse event rate were observed. Synchronous video exercise sessions with video monitoring and safety protocols may improve response to adverse exercise related events.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.387

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.309 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Preventive CardiologySame topicCardiac Health and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207