|Title:||Virtual pulmonary rehabilitation: virtual reality or virtual insanity?|
|Author(s):||K Devenney and C Gleeson|
|Institution:||St. James's Hospital|
|Poster:||Click to view poster|
|Abstract:||Emergent literature suggests Virtual Pulmonary Rehabilitation (VPR) may be as effective as traditional models of Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) for improving key patient outcomes.|
We examined accessibility, completion rates, safety and effectiveness (minimally important difference (MID) in exercise capacity or health status) of an 8 week (x2/weekly) supervised VPR programme on Zoom for patients with chronic respiratory disease (CRD). Pre and post outcomes included a 1-minute sit-to-stand test and/or 6-minute walk test (6MWT) as a measure of exercise capacity. Health status was measured using a disease specific questionnaire.
An initial scoping review of the PR waiting list (n=54) found that 33.3% (n=18) were interested in VPR and had IT access. Sixty eight participants (female 43.2%, mean age 68.4±11.2 years, mean MRCD 2.8±1) enrolled over 1-year. The dropout rate was 45.5% (n=31). Post assessment outcomes (n=34) demonstrated MID in exercise capacity or health status was achieved in 91.1% of participants (70.5%, n=24 in exercise capacity; 50%, n=17 in health status; 29.4%, n=10 both). No adverse events were recorded.
This service evaluation found barriers to engagement with telehealth in people with CRD. While safety and feasibility were demonstrated, clinical effectiveness has not been fully established.