Literature DB >> 15066361

Health-care consumption and recurrent myocardial infarction after 1 year of conventional treatment versus short- and long-term cardiac rehabilitation.

Pierre Boulay1, Denis Prud'homme.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The objective of the present study was to compare the efficacy of a conventional treatment and short- and a long-term cardiac rehabilitation program in terms of health-care consumption and recurrence of myocardial infarction in coronary heart disease (CHD) patients.
METHODS: One hundred twenty-eight patients were followed over a 1-year period post-myocardial infarction (MI). The patients in the control group (n = 54) received conventional treatment (COT) including general education on CHD and risk factor management by their physician. On the other hand, 74 patients agreed to participate in a formal phase 1 and 2 short-term cardiac rehabilitation program (ST-CRP) for a period of 3 months. Of these 74 patients, 37 participated for at least 1 year post-MI in a medically supervised phase 3 long-term cardiac rehabilitation program (LT-CRP).
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics, prevalence of CHD risk factors, and short-term cardiovascular disease (CVD) prognosis were similar among groups. After a 1-year follow-up post-MI, the percentage of patients assessed for chest pain or suspicion of cardiac-related problems at the emergency room (ER) and the total number of visits to the ER were similar among groups. However, the percentage of patients and the total number of hospital readmissions were significantly less (P < 0.05) at 1-year follow-up in the LT-CRP group. The total number and the mean of visits to the ER and hospital readmissions at 3 months were similar among the three groups. However, there were significantly fewer (P < 0.05) visits to the ER and hospital readmissions for the remainder of the year (between 3 and 12 months) for the patients in the LT-CRP group. Furthermore, patients who received COT had a significantly higher incidence of recurrent MI and fatal MI over the 1-year follow-up in comparison to the patients in the ST- and LT-CRP groups.
CONCLUSION: These results support the recommendation of an ST- or LT-CRP in secondary prevention to lower the incidence of recurrent and fatal MI. However, LT-CRP was more efficient at reducing health-care consumption after a 1-year follow-up post-MI than ST-CRP.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15066361     DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2003.11.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  10 in total

1.  Geographic issues in cardiac rehabilitation utilization: a narrative review.

Authors:  Yvonne W Leung; Janette Brual; Alison Macpherson; Sherry L Grace
Journal:  Health Place       Date:  2010-08-10       Impact factor: 4.078

2.  Changes in short-term measures of heart rate variability after eight weeks of cardiac rehabilitation.

Authors:  Gavin R H Sandercock; Richard Grocott-Mason; David A Brodie
Journal:  Clin Auton Res       Date:  2007-02-06       Impact factor: 4.435

Review 3.  Effects of cardiac rehabilitation referral strategies on referral and enrollment rates.

Authors:  Shannon Gravely-Witte; Yvonne W Leung; Rajiv Nariani; Hala Tamim; Paul Oh; Victoria M Chan; Sherry L Grace
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2009-12-08       Impact factor: 32.419

4.  Impact of cardiac rehabilitation exercise program on left ventricular diastolic function in coronary artery disease: a pilot study.

Authors:  Punsak Wuthiwaropas; Diego Bellavia; Mohamed Omer; Ray W Squires; Christopher G Scott; Patricia A Pellikka
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2012-11-18       Impact factor: 2.357

5.  Barriers to participation in cardiac rehabilitation.

Authors:  Shannon M Dunlay; Brandi J Witt; Thomas G Allison; Sharonne N Hayes; Susan A Weston; Ellen Koepsell; Véronique L Roger
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2009-09-29       Impact factor: 4.749

6.  Do Cardiac Rehabilitation Affect Clinical Prognoses Such as Recurrence, Readmission, Revascularization, and Mortality After AMI?: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Chul Kim; Insun Choi; Songhee Cho; Ae Ryoung Kim; Wonseok Kim; Sungju Jee
Journal:  Ann Rehabil Med       Date:  2021-02-09

7.  Drive time to cardiac rehabilitation: at what point does it affect utilization?

Authors:  Janette Brual; Shannon Gravely-Witte; Neville Suskin; Donna E Stewart; Alison Macpherson; Sherry L Grace
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2010-06-04       Impact factor: 3.918

Review 8.  The prognostic effect of cardiac rehabilitation in the era of acute revascularisation and statin therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized studies - The Cardiac Rehabilitation Outcome Study (CROS).

Authors:  Bernhard Rauch; Constantinos H Davos; Patrick Doherty; Daniel Saure; Maria-Inti Metzendorf; Annett Salzwedel; Heinz Völler; Katrin Jensen; Jean-Paul Schmid
Journal:  Eur J Prev Cardiol       Date:  2016-10-25       Impact factor: 7.804

Review 9.  The effectiveness of modern cardiac rehabilitation: A systematic review of recent observational studies in non-attenders versus attenders.

Authors:  Jennifer Sumner; Alexander Harrison; Patrick Doherty
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Effectiveness of comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation in coronary artery disease patients treated according to contemporary evidence based medicine: Update of the Cardiac Rehabilitation Outcome Study (CROS-II).

Authors:  Annett Salzwedel; Katrin Jensen; Bernhard Rauch; Patrick Doherty; Maria-Inti Metzendorf; Matthes Hackbusch; Heinz Völler; Jean-Paul Schmid; Constantinos H Davos
Journal:  Eur J Prev Cardiol       Date:  2020-02-23       Impact factor: 7.804

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.