Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39704643›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2025

Fully remote versus hybrid supervision of pulmonary telerehabilitation in COVID-19: a randomized clinical trial.

Bruna S Vian, Lígia S Ratti, Mariangela R Resende, Lucieni de O Conterno, Mônica C Pereira, RECOVID Group

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Bruna S VianPhysiotherapy and Occupational Therapy Service, University Hospital, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil - brusvian@unicamp.br.
Lígia S RattiPhysiotherapy and Occupational Therapy Service, University Hospital, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil.
Mariangela R ResendeDivision of Infectivology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil.
Lucieni de O ConternoDivision of Infectivology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil.
Mônica C PereiraDivision of Pneumology, Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University of Campinas, Campinas, Brazil.
RECOVID Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic have impeded the traditional rehabilitation process, prompting the widespread adoption of remote programs for the recovery of survivors.

aimThe aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of a pulmonary telerehabilitation program (PTRP) in the exclusively remote modality versus the hybrid modality (remote and face-to-face) in patients with persistent respiratory dysfunction following hospitalization for COVID-19 pneumonia, and to compare the functional capacity of patients who participated in a PTRP with those who did not.

designA randomised, interventional, prospective clinical trial was conducted. In parallel, an observational cohort study was conducted.

settingOutpatient rehabilitation clinic and home-based rehabilitation program. POPULATION: Thirty patients post-COVID-19 were randomised into two groups: G1 (fully remote supervision of PTRP) or G2 (hybrid supervision of PTRP). Thirty-seven post-COVID-19 patients were followed up without participating in PTRP (non-intervention group - NIG).

methodsPatients with persistent respiratory dysfunction and reduced functional capacity, as measured by the Six Minute Walk Test (6MWT), after hospitalization for COVID-19 pneumonia, were considered eligible for a PTRP. To assess the efficacy of the PTRP, the primary outcome (I) was distance walked on the 6MWT (6MWD) and the secondary outcome (II) was quality of life as assessed by the SF-36 questionnaire.

resultsBoth G1 and G2 demonstrated similar improvement in 6MWD, P<0.001 and quality of life (P<0.05). The IG showed higher 6MWD than the NIG (P<0.001). The increase in 6MWD for the IG was 140.5 m, while for the NIG it was 16.8 m (P=0.002).

conclusionsThe PTRP was found to be a feasible and highly effective intervention for restoring functional capacity and improving quality of life, regardless of the type of supervision. Furthermore, this functional gain was maintained over the long term. In patients with pulmonary dysfunction, participation in the PTRP improved functional capacity compared with those who were simply advised to resume physical activity during recovery. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Telerehabilitation has been demonstrated to be a viable and efficacious alternative to traditional in-person programs in low-income contexts.

Indexed as

COVID-19TelerehabilitationAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesQuality of LifeSARS-CoV-2Walk Test

Identifiers

PMID39704643
PMCPMC11920754

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.