Cited by 320Cardiac Health and Mental HealthTelemedicine and Telehealth ImplementationMobile Health and mHealth Applications

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 32 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effects and costs of real-time cardiac telerehabilitation: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial

Open access

Abstract

Objective: Compare the effects and costs of remotely monitored exercise-based cardiac telerehabilitation (REMOTE-CR) with centre-based programmes (CBexCR) in adults with coronary heart disease (CHD). Methods: Participants were randomised to receive 12 weeks of telerehabilitation or centre-based rehabilitation. REMOTE-CR provided individualised exercise prescription, real-time exercise monitoring/coaching and theory-based behavioural strategies via a bespoke telerehabilitation platform; CBexCR provided individualised exercise prescription and coaching via established rehabilitation clinics. Outcomes assessed at baseline, 12 and/or 24 weeks included maximal oxygen uptake (V̇O 2 max, primary) modifiable cardiovascular risk factors, exercise adherence, motivation, health-related quality of life and programme delivery, hospital service utilisation and medication costs. The primary hypothesis was a non-inferior between-group difference in V̇O 2 max at 12 weeks (inferiority margin=−1.25 mL/kg/min); inferiority margins were not set for secondary outcomes. Results: 162 participants (mean 61±12.7 years, 86% men) were randomised. V̇O 2 max was comparable in both groups at 12 weeks and REMOTE-CR was non-inferior to CBexCR (REMOTE-CR-CBexCR adjusted mean difference (AMD)=0.51 (95% CI −0.97 to 1.98) mL/kg/min, p=0.48). REMOTE-CR participants were less sedentary at 24 weeks (AMD=−61.5 (95% CI −117.8 to −5.3) min/day, p=0.03), while CBexCR participants had smaller waist (AMD=1.71 (95% CI 0.09 to 3.34) cm, p=0.04) and hip circumferences (AMD=1.16 (95% CI 0.06 to 2.27) cm, p=0.04) at 12 weeks. No other between-group differences were detected. Per capita programme delivery (NZD1130/GBP573 vs NZD3466/GBP1758) and medication costs (NZD331/GBP168 vs NZD605/GBP307, p=0.02) were lower for REMOTE-CR. Hospital service utilisation costs were not statistically significantly different (NZD3459/GBP1754 vs NZD5464/GBP2771, p=0.20). Conclusion: REMOTE-CR is an effective, cost-efficient alternative delivery model that could—as a complement to existing services—improve overall utilisation rates by increasing reach and satisfying unique participant preferences.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/heartjnl-2018-313189

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Remotely monitored exercise-based cardiac telerehabilitation platform schematic.
Figure 1 Remotely monitored exercise-based cardiac telerehabilitation platform schematic.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Trial flowchart.
Figure 2 Trial flowchart.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 32 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 320

Metadata

Authors
Maddison, R., Rawstorn, J. C., Stewart, R. A. H., Benatar, J., Whittaker, R., Rolleston, A., Jiang, Y., Gao, L., Moodie, M., Warren, I., Meads, A., & Gant, N.
Affiliations
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • Auckland City Hospital (NZ)
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • The Centre for Health (New Zealand) (NZ)
Corresponding author
Rawstorn, Jonathan Charles
Venue
Heart
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2018-08-27
Volume
105
Issue
2
Pages
122-129
ISSN
  • 1355-6037 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-201X
OpenAlex
W2889374857
Cited by
320
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 52 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 59 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 5
FWCI
15.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Heart (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Own your potential (DEAKIN) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
Auckland Medical Research Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Telemedicine and Telehealth Implementation
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
cardiac telerehabilitation, coronary artery disease, exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation, VO2max, sedentary behavior, cardiovascular risk factors, health-related quality of life, drug costs, non-inferiority, behavioral strategies, exercise adherence, motivation, New Zealand
MeSH terms
Coronary Disease, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Exercise Therapy, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, New Zealand, Quality of Life, Rehabilitation Centers, Treatment Outcome, Telemedicine, Internet

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review