A mixed-methods feasibility study of Hybrid-Pulmonary Rehabilitation

Résumé fourni par la source

Introduction: Digital pulmonary rehabilitation (Digital-PR) has been proposed as an alternative to supervised centre-based PR (Centre-PR) to increase capacity, accessibility and uptake. However, Digital-PR may also have a role in supporting (rather than replacing) Centre-PR. Aim: Test the feasibility and acceptability of a hybrid model of PR (Hybrid-PR), blending Centre-PR with Digital-PR using a smartphone app (Active+me REMOTE app) Methods: Design: A real world, mixed-methods, feasibility study. Participants: Patients with chronic respiratory disease, MRC Dyspnoea ≥2, referred to PR. Intervention: Participants were offered Centre-PR (2 supervised sessions/week for 8 weeks). Video telerehabilitation or home-based PR were offered as alternatives. All were offered Digital-PR, a smartphone app providing pre-recorded exercise videos, education and exercise logging. Participants were encouraged to replace some Centre-PR with Digital-PR alone Results: Of 178 eligible patients, 69 consented. Digital hesitancy was the main reason for non-enrolment (53%). 87% opted for Centre-PR, 10% Video-PR and 3% Home-PR. 86% activated Digital-PR at least once with 35% activating regularly (≥once a week). 88% never accessed the exercise videos. Only one participant replaced Centre-PR with Digital-PR but did not access any pre-recorded exercise videos. Hybrid-PR did not reduce the number of scheduled Centre-PR sessions or staff time. Participants identified digital hesitancy and strong preference for face-to-face supervision by healthcare professionals as barriers to Digital-PR. Conclusion: There was limited engagement with Digital-PR. Hybrid-PR was not associated with a reduction in supervised sesssions or staff time compare with Centre-PR alone.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.