Efficacy of an interactive virtual education model compared to a traditional education model in cardiopulmonary rehabilitation

Abstract

The goal of this research was to evaluate the efficacy of an interactive virtual education model compared to a traditional education model in cardiopulmonary rehabilitation (CR). The number one cause of death in the United States is cardiovascular disease (CVD) and CR has been shown to decrease readmission rates and second events in those with CVD. Risk factor modification is important for patients with CVD as living a healthy lifestyle is key to reducing adverse cardiovascular events. However, many people have low health literacy, which plays a large role in determining future health outcomes and can also act as a barrier to self-managing one’s health. Therefore, novel approaches for education are needed to improve patient knowledge and increase patient health outcomes. Methods: Forty-one patients were originally recruited for the study and twenty-one patients with diagnoses of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), chronic heart failure (CHF), mitral valve replacement (MVR), non-elevated ST segment myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), elevated ST segment myocardial infarction (STEMI), and transaortic valve replacement (TAVR) were included in data analysis. Patients were referred to outpatient CR by a physician, went through the normal orientation process, then randomly assigned into the traditional or online education group. Efficacy of education was assessed by the second version of coronary artery disease education questionnaire (CADE-Q2), patient health questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), and Rate Your Plate (RYP) surveys administered before and after completion of CR. Scores from each survey and questionnaire were averaged and compared between each group to assess pre- to post- scores by a two-way repeated-measures ANOVA. Patient demographics were compared using an unpaired t-test. Results: There were no differences (p>0.05) in age, sex, BMI, or number of sessions between the two groups. There was a main effect of time (p<0.05) across all measurements in both groups. However, there were no interactions (p>0.05) for any outcome indicting no differences between the online intervention group and the traditional group. Conclusion: CR is beneficial in increasing functional capacity, healthy lifestyle modifications, and reducing depression symptoms. Online education is as beneficial as the traditional education given and can be used to further personalize patient education and contribute to home-hybrid-based CR (HHBCR) education.