Literature DB >> 28159358

Patients' preference for exercise setting and its influence on the health benefits gained from exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation.

Lars H Tang1, Selina Kikkenborg Berg2, Jan Christensen3, Jannik Lawaetz4, Patrick Doherty5, Rod S Taylor6, Henning Langberg7, Ann-Dorthe Zwisler8.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient preference for exercise setting and examine if choice of setting influences the long-term health benefit of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation.
METHODS: Patients participating in a randomised controlled trial following either heart valve surgery, or radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation were given the choice to perform a 12-week exercise programme in either a supervised centre-based, or a self-management home-based setting. Exercise capacity and physical and mental health outcomes were assessed for up to 24months after hospital discharge. Outcomes between settings were compared using a time×setting interaction using a mixed effects regression model.
RESULTS: Across the 158 included patients, an equivalent proportion preferred to undertake exercise rehabilitation in a centre-based setting (55%, 95% CI: 45% to 63%) compared to a home-based setting (45%, 95% CI: 37% to 53%, p=0.233). At baseline, those who preferred a home-based setting reported better physical health (mean difference in physical component score: 5.0, 95% CI 2.3 to 7.4; p=0.001) and higher exercise capacity (mean between group difference 15.9watts, 95% CI 3.7 to 28.1; p=0.011). With the exception of the depression score in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (F(3.65), p=0.004), there was no evidence of a significant difference in outcomes between settings.
CONCLUSION: The preference of patients to participate in home-based and centre-based exercise programmes appears to be equivalent and provides similar health benefits. Whilst these findings support that patients should be given the choice between exercise-settings when initiating cardiac rehabilitation, further confirmatory evidence is needed. Copyright Â
© 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Atrial fibrillation; Cardiac rehabilitation; Exercise setting; Exercise training; Heart valve diseases; Patient preference

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28159358     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.01.126

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  11 in total

1.  Home-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation: A SCIENTIFIC STATEMENT FROM THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CARDIOVASCULAR AND PULMONARY REHABILITATION, THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION, AND THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF CARDIOLOGY.

Authors:  Randal J Thomas; Alexis L Beatty; Theresa M Beckie; LaPrincess C Brewer; Todd M Brown; Daniel E Forman; Barry A Franklin; Steven J Keteyian; Dalane W Kitzman; Judith G Regensteiner; Bonnie K Sanderson; Mary A Whooley
Journal:  J Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 2.081

2.  Home-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Scientific Statement From the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, the American Heart Association, and the American College of Cardiology.

Authors:  Randal J Thomas; Alexis L Beatty; Theresa M Beckie; LaPrincess C Brewer; Todd M Brown; Daniel E Forman; Barry A Franklin; Steven J Keteyian; Dalane W Kitzman; Judith G Regensteiner; Bonnie K Sanderson; Mary A Whooley
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2019-05-13       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  Are physical fitness outcomes in patients attending cardiac rehabilitation determined by the mode of delivery?

Authors:  Alexander S Harrison; Lars Tang; Patrick Doherty
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2018-07-16

4.  Delivery preferences for psychological intervention in cardiac rehabilitation: a pilot discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Gemma Elizabeth Shields; Stuart Wright; Adrian Wells; Patrick Doherty; Lora Capobianco; Linda Mary Davies
Journal:  Open Heart       Date:  2021-08

Review 5.  Cardiac Rehabilitation and Survival for Ischemic Heart Disease.

Authors:  Rebecca Lolley; Daniel E Forman
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2021-11-06       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 6.  Cardio-Oncology Rehabilitation and Telehealth: Rationale for Future Integration in Supportive Care of Cancer Survivors.

Authors:  Ladislav Batalik; Katerina Filakova; Ivana Radkovcova; Filip Dosbaba; Petr Winnige; Daniela Vlazna; Katerina Batalikova; Marian Felsoci; Marios Stefanakis; David Liska; Jannis Papathanasiou; Andrea Pokorna; Andrea Janikova; Sebastian Rutkowski; Garyfallia Pepera
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-04-15

7.  Fit, Female or Fifty-Is Cardiac Rehabilitation "Fit" for Purpose for All? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis With Meta-Regression.

Authors:  Martin Smith; Jessica Orchard; Andre La Gerche; Robyn Gallagher; Jane Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-03-29

Review 8.  Mobile health and cardiac rehabilitation in older adults.

Authors:  John Bostrom; Greg Sweeney; Jonathan Whiteson; John A Dodson
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 2.882

Review 9.  Cardiac rehabilitation in older adults: New options.

Authors:  Kartik R Kumar; Ileana L Pina
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 2.882

10.  Research Priorities in the Secondary Prevention of Atrial Fibrillation: A National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Virtual Workshop Report.

Authors:  Emelia J Benjamin; Sana M Al-Khatib; Patrice Desvigne-Nickens; Alvaro Alonso; Luc Djoussé; Daniel E Forman; Anne M Gillis; Jeroen M L Hendriks; Mellanie True Hills; Paulus Kirchhof; Mark S Link; Gregory M Marcus; Reena Mehra; Katherine T Murray; Ratika Parkash; Ileana L Piña; Susan Redline; Michiel Rienstra; Prashanthan Sanders; Virend K Somers; David R Van Wagoner; Paul J Wang; Lawton S Cooper; Alan S Go
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2021-08-05       Impact factor: 6.106

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.