Abstract
Purpose - To examine changes in device-based 24-hour movement behaviours (MB), and facilitators and barriers to physical activity (PA) and exercise, during remotely-delivered cardiac rehabilitation (RDCR).
Materials and methods - This prospective observational study used wrist-worn GENEActiv accelerometers to assess MB of 10 service-users (63 ± 10 years) at the start, middle, and end of three-months of RDCR. Barriers and facilitators to PA and exercise were explored through self-report diaries and analysed using content analysis.
Results - At start, service-users were sedentary for 12.6 ± 0.7 h ⋅ day−1 and accumulated most PA at a light-intensity (133.52 ± 28.57 min ⋅ day−1) – neither changed significantly during RDCR. Sleep efficiency significantly reduced from start (88.80 ± 4.2%) to the end (86.1 ± 4.76%) of CR, with values meeting health-based recommendations (≥85%). Barriers to RDCR exercise included exertional discomfort and cardiac symptoms, and reduced confidence when exercising alone. Setting meaningful PA goals, self-monitoring health targets, and having social support, facilitated PA and exercise during RDCR.
Conclusions - Our RDCR programme failed to elicit significant changes in MB or sleep. To increase the likelihood of successful RDCR, it is important to promote a variety of exercise and PA options, target sedentary time, and apply theory to RDCR design, delivery, and support strategies.
Materials and methods - This prospective observational study used wrist-worn GENEActiv accelerometers to assess MB of 10 service-users (63 ± 10 years) at the start, middle, and end of three-months of RDCR. Barriers and facilitators to PA and exercise were explored through self-report diaries and analysed using content analysis.
Results - At start, service-users were sedentary for 12.6 ± 0.7 h ⋅ day−1 and accumulated most PA at a light-intensity (133.52 ± 28.57 min ⋅ day−1) – neither changed significantly during RDCR. Sleep efficiency significantly reduced from start (88.80 ± 4.2%) to the end (86.1 ± 4.76%) of CR, with values meeting health-based recommendations (≥85%). Barriers to RDCR exercise included exertional discomfort and cardiac symptoms, and reduced confidence when exercising alone. Setting meaningful PA goals, self-monitoring health targets, and having social support, facilitated PA and exercise during RDCR.
Conclusions - Our RDCR programme failed to elicit significant changes in MB or sleep. To increase the likelihood of successful RDCR, it is important to promote a variety of exercise and PA options, target sedentary time, and apply theory to RDCR design, delivery, and support strategies.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Number of pages | 12 |
Journal | Disability and Rehabilitation |
Early online date | 11 Sept 2024 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Early online - 11 Sept 2024 |
Keywords
- Exercise
- sedentary behaviour
- physical inactivity
- movement behaviours
- remote-delivery
- cardiac rehabilitation