Cardiac Rehabilitation During the COVID-19 Pandemic and the Potential for Digital Technology to Support Physical Activity Maintenance: Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Social distancing from the COVID-19 pandemic may have decreased engagement in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) and may have had possible consequences on post-CR exercise maintenance. The increased use of technology as an adaptation may benefit post-CR participants via wearables and social media. Thus, we sought to explore the possible relationships of both the pandemic and technology on post-CR exercise maintenance. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) understand CR participation during the COVID-19 pandemic, (2) identify perceived barriers and facilitators to physical activity after CR completion, and (3) assess willingness to use technology and social media to support physical activity needs among older adults with cardiovascular disease. METHODS: We recruited participants aged 55 years and older in 3 different CR programs offered at both public and private hospitals in Northern California. We conducted individual interviews on CR experiences, physical activity, and potential for using technology. We used thematic analysis to synthesize the data. RESULTS: In total, 22 participants (n=9, 41% female participants; mean age 73, SD 8 years) completed in-depth interviews. Themes from participants' feedback included the following: (1) anxiety and frustration about the wait for CR caused by COVID-19 conditions, (2) positive and safe participant experience once in CR during the pandemic, (3) greater attention needed to patients after completion of CR, (4) notable demand for technology during the pandemic and after completion of CR, and (5) social media networking during the CR program considered valuable if training is provided. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals who completed CR identified shared concerns about continuing physical activity despite having positive experiences during the CR program. There were significant challenges during the pandemic and heightened concerns for safety and health. The idea of providing support by leveraging digital technology (wearable devices and social media for social support) resonated as a potential solution to help bridge the gap from CR to more independent physical activity. More attention is needed to help individuals experience a tailored and safe transition to home to maintain physical activity among those who complete CR.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".