Cost effectiveness and functional outcomes of smartphone cardiac rehabilitation assisted self-management versus centre based cardiac rehabilitation among patients with coronary heart disease in Southern India: a multicentre randomized clinical trial protocol

Premkumar Mariarathinam; Amit Kiran; Rajasekar Sannasi; Ajay Kumar

doi:10.18203/2349-3259.ijct20243333

Authors

Premkumar Mariarathinam Institute of Physiotherapy, Srinivas University, City Campus, Pandeshwar, Mangaluru, Karnataka, India
Amit Kiran Cardiothoracic Surgeon, Srinivas Hospital, Mukka, Srinivas Nagar, Surathkal, Mangaluru, Karnataka, India https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7887-3184
Rajasekar Sannasi Institute of Physiotherapy, Srinivas University, City Campus, Pandeshwar, Mangaluru, Karnataka, India
Ajay Kumar Institute of Physiotherapy, Srinivas University, City Campus, Pandeshwar, Mangaluru, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-3259.ijct20243333

Keywords:

Cardiac rehabilitation, Cost effectiveness, Clinical trial protocol, Coronary artery disease

Abstract

Background: To attain the world specific indicators of quality on programs which brings rehabilitation for cardiac diseases and surgeries in India are to be brought to meet the international standards. Dearth of published research on cost effectiveness of smart phone application oriented CR assisted self-management (SCRAM) over centre based (CBCR) in Indian Population drives this study to be done. This study aims to analyze cost effectiveness of SCRAM versus CBCR in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients.

Methods: In this multicentre randomized clinical trial, 100 subjects with uncomplicated CAD will be recruited through purposive sampling and divided into group A and B through block randomization. Group A will be treated with CBCR whereas group B with SCRAM. Outcome measures of 6 minutes’ walk test distance, talk test values and SF 36 scores, high density lipoprotein level and 3 months’ average blood glucose level were documented pre and post interventions and 3, 6, 12 months follow up for data analysis. This study will follow human study ethical consideration based on Declaration of Helsinki.

Conclusions: Cost effectiveness of experimental group where SCRAM given as intervention may be better post intervention than control group where CBCR given. By this way this RCT protocol may bring the execution cost down with coronary heart disease patients which play a major role in participation of these patients in CR programs.

Trial registration: The trial was registered with CTRI – Clinical Trial Registry of India (ICMR) - CTRI/2022/11/047143 (registered on: 09 November 2022) - trial registered prospectively.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

GBD 2013 Mortality and Causes of Death Collaborators. Global, regional, and national age-sex specific all-cause and cause-specific mortality for 240 causes of death, 1990-2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet. 2015;385(9963):117-71.

Kachur S, Chongthammakun V, Lavie CJ, De Schutter A, Arena R, Milani RV, et al. Impact of cardiac rehabilitation and exercise training programs in coronary heart disease. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2017;60(1):103-14.

Cheong CK, Dean L, Dougall I, Hinchliffe S, Mirani K, Vosnaki K, et al. The Scottish Health Survey 2018 edition; amended in February 2020. Volume 1. 2020.

Dibben G, Faulkner J, Oldridge N, Rees K, Thompson DR, Zwisler AD, Taylor RS. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;11(11):CD001800.

Kelly BB, Fuster V. Promoting cardiovascular health in the developing world: a critical challenge to achieve global health. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 2010.

World Health Organization. Cardiovascular Diseases (CVDs) Fact Sheet. 2015. Available at: https://www. who.int/health-topics/cardiovascular-diseases#:~: text=Cardiovascular%20diseases%20(CVDs)%20are%20the,heart%20disease%20and%20other%20conditions. Accessed on 12 August 2024.

Yang ZK, Shen WF, Zhang RY, Kong Y, Zhang JS, Hu J, et al. Coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary disease. J Interv Cardiol. 2007;20(1):10-6.

Bartels MN. Cardiac rehabilitation. Essential Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. Springer Link. 2006;119-45.

Yohannes AM, Doherty P, Bundy C, Yalfani A. The long-term benefits of cardiac rehabilitation on depression, anxiety, physical activity and quality of life. J Clin Nurs. 2010;19(19-20):2806-13.

Perrotti A, Ecarnot F, Monaco F, Dorigo E, Monteleone P, Besch G, et al. Quality of life 10 years after cardiac surgery in adults: a long-term follow-up study. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2019;17(1):88.

Chockalingam P, Rajaram A, Maiya A, Contractor A. A multicentre retrospective study on quality and outcomes of cardiac rehabilitation programs in India. Indian Heart J. 2020;72(1):55-7.

Leon AS, Franklin BA, Costa F, Balady GJ, Berra KA, Stewart KJ, et al. Cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease: an American Heart Association scientific statement from the Council on Clinical Cardiology (Subcommittee on Exercise, Cardiac Rehabilitation, and Prevention) and the Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism (Subcommittee on Physical Activity), in collaboration with the American association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation. Circulation. 2005;111(3):369-76.

American Association of Cardiovascular & Pulmonary Rehabilitation. Guidelines for Cardia Rehabilitation and Secondary Prevention Programs. Human Kinetics. 2013. Available at: https://us. humankinetics.com/products/guidelines-for-cardiac-rehabilitation-programs-6th-edition-with-web-resource?srsltid=AfmBOooW1LnfxjWcixZDVehS2jdFwpkJu0nDuJwrFQmqL65WrvYf-cYO. Accessed on 12 August 2024.

Supervia M, Turk-Adawi K, Lopez-Jimenez F, Pesah E, Ding R, Britto RR, et al. Nature of Cardiac Rehabilitation Around the Globe. E-Clin Med. 2019;13:46-56.

Neubeck L, Freedman SB, Clark AM, Briffa T, Bauman A, Redfern J. Participating in cardiac rehabilitation: a systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative data. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2012;19(3):494-503.

Maddison R, Rawstorn JC, Stewart RAH, Benatar J, Whittaker R, Rolleston A, et al. Effects and costs of real-time cardiac telerehabilitation: randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Heart. 2019;105(2):122-9.

Saini M, Kulandaivelan S, Devi P, Saini V. The talk test-A costless tool for exercise prescription in Indian cardiac rehabilitation. Indian Heart J. 2018;70(3):S466-70.

Brown K. A review to examine the use of SF-36 in cardiac rehabilitation. Br J Nursing. 2003;12(15):904-9.

Rawstorn JC, Ball K, Oldenburg B, Chow CK, McNaughton SA, Lamb KE, et al. Smartphone Cardiac Rehabilitation, Assisted Self-Management Versus Usual Care: Protocol for a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial to Compare Effects and Costs Among People With Coronary Heart Disease. JMIR Res Protoc. 2020;9(1):e15022.

Shapiro SS, Wilk MB. An analysis of variance test for normality (complete samples). Biometrika. 1965;52(3/4):591-611.

Razali NM, Wah YB. Power comparisons of shapiro-wilk, kolmogorov-smirnov, lilliefors and anderson-darling tests. J Statistical Modeling Analytics. 2011;2(1):21-33.

Park HM. Univariate analysis and normality test using SAS, Stata, and SPSS. The Trustees of Indiana University. 2015. Available at: http://www.indiana. edu/statmath. Accessed on 12 August 2024.

Altman DG. Relation between several variables. Practical statistics for medical research. Oxford Academic. 1991.

Peacock JL, Kerry SM, Balise RR. Writing a research protocol. In: Presenting Medical Statistics: From Proposal to Publication. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press; 2017: 32-34.