ABSTRACT
Telerehabilitation (TR) was developed to achieve the same results as would be achieved by the standard rehabilitation process and to overcome potential geographical barriers and staff deficiencies. This is especially relevant in periodic crisis situations, including the current COVID-19 pandemic. Proper execution of TR strategy requires both well-educated staff and dedicated equipment. Various studies have shown that TR may have similar effects to traditional rehabilitation in terms of clinical outcomes and may also reduce total healthcare costs per participant, including rehospitalization costs. However, as with any method, TR has its advantages and disadvantages, including a lack of direct contact or prerequisite, rudimentary ability of the patients to handle mobile devices, among other competencies. Herein, is a discussion of the current status of TR, focusing primarily on cardiac TR, describing some technical/organizational and legal aspects, highlighting the indications, examining cost-effectiveness, as well as outlining possible future directions.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The collateral damage caused by the COVID-19 pandemic influences cardiovascular disease patients, mainly acute coronary syndrome (ACS) cases. Additionally, lockdown has caused treatment-related concerns and reluctance, factors that can delay treatment. AIM: To analyse the incidence and course of ACS patients following the first COVID-19 wave. METHODS: The report represents a multi-institutional registry of 10 interventional cardiology departments. ACS patient data were gathered from June to October 2020, the period following the first lockdown in Poland (March 30-May 31, 2020), and compared with the corresponding 2019 timeframe. RESULTS: Patients (2801 and 2620) hospitalized for ACS in 2019 and 2020 (June-October), represent 52.8% and 57.9% of coronary artery disease admissions, respectively. In 2020 vs. 2019, more cases of arterial hypertension (80.2% vs. 71.5%; P <0.001), diabetes (32.7% vs. 28.2%; P <0.001), hyperlipidaemia (53.2% vs. 49.8%; P = 0.01) and smoking history (29.5% vs. 25.8%; P = 0.003) were detected. Median troponin and cholesterol values, as well as glycemia were higher in 2020. Patients were more likely to undergo percutaneous treatment (91.2% vs. 87.5%; P <0.001) and less often referred for surgery (3.7% vs. 4.9%; P = 0.03). No differences in deaths, repeat myocardial infarction, stroke, and/or composite endpoint (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events [MACCE]) were noted. However, suffering from ACS in 2020 (June-October) was a risk factor for mortality based on a multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic affects ACS patient profile, course of treatment, and increases risk for mortality.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: An investigation of baseline characteristics, treatment, and outcomes in patients with stable coronary disease after the first wave of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic may provide valuable data and is beneficial for public health strategy in upcoming years. METHODS: A multi-institutional registry, including 10 cardiology departments, was searched for patients admitted from June 2020 to October 2020. The baseline characteristics (age, gender, symptoms, comorbidities), treatment (non-invasive, invasive, surgical), and hospitalization outcome (mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, composite endpoint - major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events [MACCE]) were evaluated. The comparison was made to parameters presented by patients from the same timeframe in 2019 (June-October). Multivariable analysis was performed. RESULTS: Number of hospitalized stable patients following lockdown was lower (2498 vs. 1903; p < 0.0001). They were younger (68.0 vs. 69.0; p < 0.019), more likely to present with hypertension (88.5% vs. 77.5%; p < 0.0001), diabetes (35.7% vs. 31.5%; p = 0.003), hyperlipidemia (67.9% vs. 55.4%; p < 0.0001), obesity (35.8% vs. 31.3%; p = 0.002), and more pronounced symptoms (Canadian Cardiovascular Society [CCS] III and CCS class IV angina: 30.4% vs. 26.5%; p = 0.005). They underwent percutaneous treatment more often (35.0% vs. 25.9%; p < 0.0001) and were less likely to be referred for surgery (3.7% vs. 4.9%; p = 0.0001). There were no significant differences in hospitalization outcome. New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV for heart failure was a risk factor for both mortality and MACCE in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The SARS-CoV-2 2019 pandemic affected the characteristics and hospitalization course of stable angina patients hospitalized following the first wave. The hospitalization outcome was similar in the analyzed time intervals. The higher prevalence of comorbidities raises concern regarding upcoming years.