Efficacy of telerehabilitation compared to face-to-face cardiopulmonary rehabilitation in COVID-19 survivors in relation to lung function, submaximal functional capacity and quality of life.
XXXXXX; XXXXXXX; XXXXX;
This dissertation is structured in the form of an article that aimed to verify if there is superiority between telerehabilitation (TR) and face-to-face rehabilitation (PR) about pulmonary function, respiratory muscle strength, submaximal functional capacity and quality of life in COVID-19 survivor patients. This is an experimental study with a probability sample. To be included in the study, individuals needed to have a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 by RT-PCR. Patients who had not been hospitalized were allocated to the RT group, while those hospitalized were allocated to the RP. They were then submitted to the following assessments: spirometry, manovacuometry, six-minute walk test (6MWT) and answered the Medical Outcomes Study Short – Form 36 quality of life questionnaire. PR at the Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation Center at Hospital das Clínicas de Pernambuco. The protocol consisted of four steps, namely: stretching, aerobic, strengthening and breathing exercises. In total, 12 sessions were held, twice a week. A total of 24 patients completed the protocol, 12 individuals in each group. There was an improvement in lung function and respiratory muscle strength in both groups, with no differences between them. Regarding submaximal functional capacity, there was an improvement in the RP group. In terms of quality of life, both groups obtained gains in all domains, except for social and emotional aspects in the PR group. There were no intergroup differences. Therefore, according to the findings of this study, there is no superiority between TR and PR in terms of pulmonary function, respiratory muscle strength and quality of life. About submaximal functional capacity, PR was superior.