Isfahan University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Mobile Phone App‑Based or Face‑To‑Face Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Covid‑19 Survivors Publisher



Atashi V1 ; Hashemi M2 ; Haghighat S3 ; Sadegh R4 ; Sami R2 ; Bahadori M5
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Adult Health Nursing Department, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
  2. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
  3. 3. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
  4. 4. Department of Community and Prevention Medicine, Medical Faculty, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
  5. 5. Adult Health Nursing Department, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Qom University of Medical Science, Qom, Iran

Source: Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research Published:2023


Abstract

Background: Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) is recommended as a standard, effective, and important treatment for COVID‑19 survivors who remain symptomatic after the acute phase. Therefore, we aimed to compare the effect of mobile phone‑based PR application with face‑to‑face PR on the quality of life, anxiety, depression, and daily life activities of COVID‑19 survivors. Materials and Methods: A quasi‑experimental was conducted on 65 COVID‑19 survivors during 2022. Convenient sampling was done based on the inclusion criteria. The intervention group (n = 31) received PR through a mobile phone application, and the control group (n = 34) received face‑to‑face PR. Data were collected before and after the intervention in both groups using a demographic information questionnaire, SF‑12, the hospital anxiety and depression scale, and Barthel scale. For all tests, a maximum error of 5% was considered. Results: The two studied groups had no statistically significant difference with respect to all the investigated variables at baseline (p > 0.05). After the intervention, the mean anxiety and depression score of the patients in the control group was significantly lower than the intervention group (t = −3.46, f = 63, p = 0.01). After our intervention, there was no statistically significant difference in the mean quality of life and daily life activity scores between the two groups (t = −0.68, f = 63, p > 0.05). Conclusions: The application of PR does not show a statistically significant difference in terms of improving the quality of life and daily activities compared with the face‑to‑face method; we suggest that the PR application be used as a cost‑effective method when face‑to‑face PR is not possible. © 2023 Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research | Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Experts (# of related papers)
Other Related Docs