Table 2.

Summary of intervention delivery and effectiveness across studies.

Study	Supervision	AVGa alone/with other programs	Effectiveness
			Results	Conclusions
Alves da Cruz et al, 2020 [18]	SVb	With cardiac rehabilitation program	Increased heart rate Increased respiratory rate Increased rate of perceived exertion	Greater heart rate, respiratory rate, and rate of perceived exertion were observed during and 5 min after the AVG session
Jaarsma et al, 2020 [20]	No SV	AVG alone	No changec in exercise capacity, muscle function, exercise motivation, exercise self-efficacy, or PAd	AVG was safe and feasible in patients with heart failure Not effective in improving outcomes
Klompstra et al, 2013 [21]	No SV	AVG alone	Increased PA Increased exercise motivation Increased exercise self-efficacy No change in perceived physical effort	Further research is needed to generalize the results from the case study
Klompstra et al, 2014 [22]	No SV	AVG alone	Exercise capacity No change in PA	AVG has the potential to increase exercise capacity in patients with heart failure
Ruivo et al, 2017 [19]	SV	With conventional program	Increased PA Increased energy expenditure per body weight	Cardiac rehabilitation sessions with AVG are feasible and safe Significant improvement in PA and energy expenditure

^aAVG: active video game.

^bSV: supervision.

^cAfter correction for baseline and confounders.

^dPA: physical activity.