The Efficacy of Telemedicine Rehabilitation Programs In Regard Of Risk Factors Control In Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Aftercatheter Ablation

Aim      To evaluate changes in traditional risk factors (RF) during cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs with remote support in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) after catheter ablation (CA).Material and methods  The lack of control of cardiovascular RFs is a predictor for AF recurr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Kardiologiia 2023-01, Vol.63 (1), p.12-20
Hauptverfasser: Pogosova, N V, Badtieva, V A, Ovchinnikova, A I, Sokolova, O Yu
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng ; rus
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Aim      To evaluate changes in traditional risk factors (RF) during cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs with remote support in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AF) after catheter ablation (CA).Material and methods  The lack of control of cardiovascular RFs is a predictor for AF recurrence after CA, development of complications, and decreased life expectancy. Telemedical CR programs may improve the control of RF and enhance the CR efficacy. This randomized controlled clinical study in three parallel groups included 135 patients aged 35 to 79 years. In groups 1 and 2, CR programs with remote support were performed, which included a single personal consulting for the disease, achieving control of all patient's RFs, and remote support during 3 months (group 1, by phone and group 2, by e-mail). Participants of group 3 received standard recommendations. Body weight, blood pressure (BP), blood lipids, smoking status, and physical activity (PA) were determined at baseline and at 12 months after CA with the IPAQ questionnaire.Results In both intervention groups at 12 months, there were positive changes in RF: body weight index decreased by 3.6 % in group 1 (р=0.01) and by 2.3 % in group 2 (р=0.002) vs. 0 in the control group; systolic BP decreased by 7.1 % (p
ISSN:0022-9040
2412-5660
DOI:10.18087/cardio.2023.1.n2124