Nathalie McIntosh1, Gemmae M Fix2, Kelly Allsup3, Martin Charns1, Sarah McDannold2, Kenneth Manning4, Daniel E Forman3. 1. VA Boston Healthcare System, 150 South Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02130. 2. Edith Nourse Rogers Memorial VA Hospital, 200 Springs Road, Bedford, MA 01730. 3. VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, 0 University Drive C, Pittsburgh, PA 15240. 4. Durham VA Medical Center, 508 Fulton Street, Durham, NC 27704.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Despite strong incentives to use cardiac rehabilitation (CR), patient participation is low in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). This is paradoxical given that VHA is an integrated health care system that offers a range of CR programs which should logically reduce barriers to access to CR participation. The purpose of this study was to better understand the contextual factors that influence patient participation in CR and how patients consider factors together when making decisions about CR participation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a qualitative study design we examined patient and provider perceptions of CR across six VHA medical centers with high- and low-enrollment rates between December 2014 and October 2015. We conducted semistructured interviews with CR eligible patients who had both enrolled and not enrolled in CR (n = 16), cardiology providers who could refer patients to CR and CR staff who provided CR services (n = 15). Data were analyzed using grounded thematic techniques. RESULTS: We identified program and patient-specific factors related to CR participation. The four program factors were: program responsiveness to patient needs, CR schedule, specialized CR program equipment, and the CR program social environment. Program factors were primarily discussed by individuals associated with sites that had high CR enrollment rates. The patient-specific factor that promoted participation was patient perceptions of CR benefits. Disincentives to participation included competing conditions or obligations, logistical/cost challenges, convenience, and fear of exercise. CR participation entailed a complex process in which patients balanced factors that reinforced patient perceptions that CR was beneficial against factors that acted as disincentives to participation. CONCLUSIONS: CR participation was influenced by both program and patient factors. Patients weighed factors that fostered perceptions that CR was beneficial against factors that served as disincentives to CR participation when considering CR participation. High-enrollment sites may be better at countering disincentives to participate and/or improve patient perceptions of CR. Actionable ways to improve CR participation include encouraging providers to strongly and frequently endorse CR, educating patients about the importance and benefits of CR, emphasizing how exercises are individualized, supervised and monitored, educating patients about how CR is safe and effective, how CR offers peer support, and structuring CR programs to be responsive to patient needs in terms of duration, frequency, schedule, and location. Reprint &
INTRODUCTION: Despite strong incentives to use cardiac rehabilitation (CR), patient participation is low in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). This is paradoxical given that VHA is an integrated health care system that offers a range of CR programs which should logically reduce barriers to access to CR participation. The purpose of this study was to better understand the contextual factors that influence patient participation in CR and how patients consider factors together when making decisions about CR participation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a qualitative study design we examined patient and provider perceptions of CR across six VHA medical centers with high- and low-enrollment rates between December 2014 and October 2015. We conducted semistructured interviews with CR eligible patients who had both enrolled and not enrolled in CR (n = 16), cardiology providers who could refer patients to CR and CR staff who provided CR services (n = 15). Data were analyzed using grounded thematic techniques. RESULTS: We identified program and patient-specific factors related to CR participation. The four program factors were: program responsiveness to patient needs, CR schedule, specialized CR program equipment, and the CR program social environment. Program factors were primarily discussed by individuals associated with sites that had high CR enrollment rates. The patient-specific factor that promoted participation was patient perceptions of CR benefits. Disincentives to participation included competing conditions or obligations, logistical/cost challenges, convenience, and fear of exercise. CR participation entailed a complex process in which patients balanced factors that reinforced patient perceptions that CR was beneficial against factors that acted as disincentives to participation. CONCLUSIONS: CR participation was influenced by both program and patient factors. Patients weighed factors that fostered perceptions that CR was beneficial against factors that served as disincentives to CR participation when considering CR participation. High-enrollment sites may be better at countering disincentives to participate and/or improve patient perceptions of CR. Actionable ways to improve CR participation include encouraging providers to strongly and frequently endorse CR, educating patients about the importance and benefits of CR, emphasizing how exercises are individualized, supervised and monitored, educating patients about how CR is safe and effective, how CR offers peer support, and structuring CR programs to be responsive to patient needs in terms of duration, frequency, schedule, and location. Reprint &