|Title:||Comparison of Subjective and Objective Outcomes in 8-Week Virtual Pulmonary Rehabilitation Program with Telehealth Alternative|
|Author(s):||C.Murray, C.Hynes, B.Fitzgibbon|
|Institution:||HSE- South East Community Healthcare|
|Poster:||Click to view poster|
|Abstract:||Comparison of Subjective and Objective Outcomes in 8-Week Virtual Pulmonary Rehabilitation Program with Telehealth Alternative|
Authors Brian Fitzgibbon (Senior Physiotherapist Respiratory Integrated Care, Carlow/Kilkenny), Conor Hynes (School of Allied Health, University of Limerick),Caoimhe Murray (School of Allied Health, University of Limerick)
a)Effectiveness of virtual/telehealth Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) versus in-person PR, demonstrated in COPDAssessment Test (CAT) scores. b)Effectiveness of virtual (VPR) versus telehealth PR, demonstrated in COPDAssessment Test (CAT), Generalised Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7), 1-minute Sit-to-Stand (1MSTS) test.
Participants in VPR and telehealthPR programmes completed pre- and post-assessments including the CAT, GAD-7 and 1MSTS outcome measures. Differences between pre- and post- scores were evaluated and compared between virtual and telehealthPR groups. The outcome measure common to both groups, CAT scores from virtual/telehealthPR participants were compared to pre-COVID, in-person PR.
In-person PR outcome measures were recorded between March 2019-2020, and virtual/telehealthPR between July 2020-May 2021. Similarly significant reduction observed in median CAT score for participants of both in-person PR (-3;n=53) and virtual/teleheathPR (-3.68;n=44) Significant reduction (-4.76 points)in median CAT score was observed for VPR participants (n=29;MCID=-2). A non-significant reduction (-0.96) observed for telehealthPR participants (n=15). Similar improvements observed in median GAD-7 scores for telehealth (-0.5; n=14) and virtual (-1; n=31)PR groups. A significant increase (3reps) in median 1MSTS scores observed for telehealthPR participants (n=19; MCID=≥3reps). A non-significant increase (2 reps) observed for VPR participants (n=33)
In-person and virtual/telehealthPR programmes were equally effective for CAT scores. VPR programmes were more effective than telehealth CAT scores.