To ascertain the effect of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) dose (ie, duration × frequency/wk; categorized as low <12 sessions, medium 12-35 sessions, or high ≥36 sessions) on mortality and morbidity.
The ...Cochrane, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and MEDLINE databases were systematically searched from inception through November 30, 2015. Inclusion criteria included randomized or nonrandomized studies with a minimum CR dose of 4 or higher and presence of a control/comparison group. Citations were considered for inclusion, and data were extracted in included studies independently by 2 investigators. Studies were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression where warranted (covariates included study quality, country, publication year, and diagnosis).
Of 4630 unique citations, 33 trials were included comparing CR to usual care (ie, no dose). In meta-regression, greater dose was significantly related to lower all-cause mortality (high: -0.77; SE, 0.22; P<.001; medium: -0.80; SE, 0.21; P<.001) when compared with low dose. With regard to morbidity, meta-analysis revealed that dose was significantly associated with fewer percutaneous coronary interventions (high: relative risk, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.50-0.84; medium/low: relative risk, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.74-1.48; between subgroup difference P=.03). This reduction was also significant in meta-regression (high vs medium/low: -0.73; SE, 0.20; P<.001). Publication bias was not evident. No dose-response association was found for cardiovascular mortality, all-cause hospitalization, coronary artery bypass graft surgery, or myocardial infarction.
A minimum of 36 CR sessions may be needed to reduce percutaneous coronary interventions. Future studies should examine the effect of actual dose of CR, and trials are needed comparing different doses.
CRD42016036029.
Too few patients utilize cardiac rehabilitation (CR), despite its benefits. The Cochrane review assessing the effectiveness of interventions to increase CR utilization (enrolment, adherence, and ...completion) was updated. A search was performed through July 2018 of the Cochrane and MEDLINE (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online) databases, among other sources. Randomized controlled trials in adults with myocardial infarction, angina, revascularization, or heart failure were included. Interventions had to aim to increase utilization of comprehensive phase II CR. Two authors independently performed all stages of citation processing. Following the random-effects meta-analysis, meta-regression was undertaken to explore the impact of pre-specified factors. Twenty-six trials with 5299 participants were included (35.8% women). Low-quality evidence showed an effect of interventions in increasing enrolment (risk ratio (RR) = 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.13⁻1.42). Meta-regression analyses suggested that the intervention deliverer (nurse or allied healthcare provider,
= 0.02) and delivery format (face-to-face,
= 0.01) were influential in increasing enrolment. There was low-quality evidence that interventions to increase adherence were effective (standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.20⁻0.55), particularly where remotely-offered (SMD = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.36⁻0.76). There was moderate-quality evidence that interventions to increase program completion were effective (RR = 1.13, 95% CI = 1.02⁻1.25). There are effective interventions to increase CR utilization, but more research is needed to establish specific, implementable materials and protocols, particularly for completion.
Background
International clinical practice guidelines routinely recommend that cardiac patients participate in rehabilitation programmes for comprehensive secondary prevention. However, data show ...that only a small proportion of these patients utilise rehabilitation.
Objectives
First, to assess interventions provided to increase patient enrolment in, adherence to, and completion of cardiac rehabilitation. Second, to assess intervention costs and associated harms, as well as interventions intended to promote equitable CR utilisation in vulnerable patient subpopulations.
Search methods
Review authors performed a search on 10 July 2018, to identify studies published since publication of the previous systematic review. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); the National Health Service (NHS) Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) databases (Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Database of s of Reviews of Effects (DARE)), in the Cochrane Library (Wiley); MEDLINE (Ovid); Embase (Elsevier); the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) (EBSCOhost); and Conference Proceedings Citation Index ‐ Science (CPCI‐S) on Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics). We checked the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews for additional studies and also searched two clinical trial registers. We applied no language restrictions.
Selection criteria
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adults with myocardial infarction, with angina, undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention, or with heart failure who were eligible for cardiac rehabilitation. Interventions had to aim to increase utilisation of comprehensive phase II cardiac rehabilitation. We included only studies that measured one or more of our primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes were harms and costs, and we focused on equity.
Data collection and analysis
Two review authors independently screened the titles and s of all identified references for eligibility, and we obtained full papers of potentially relevant trials. Two review authors independently considered these trials for inclusion, assessed included studies for risk of bias, and extracted trial data independently. We resolved disagreements through consultation with a third review author. We performed random‐effects meta‐regression for each outcome and explored prespecified study characteristics.
Main results
Overall, we included 26 studies with 5299 participants (29 comparisons). Participants were primarily male (64.2%). Ten (38.5%) studies included patients with heart failure. We assessed most studies as having low or unclear risk of bias. Sixteen studies (3164 participants) reported interventions to improve enrolment in cardiac rehabilitation, 11 studies (2319 participants) reported interventions to improve adherence to cardiac rehabilitation, and seven studies (1567 participants) reported interventions to increase programme completion. Researchers tested a variety of interventions to increase utilisation of cardiac rehabilitation. In many studies, this consisted of contacts made by a healthcare provider during or shortly after an acute care hospitalisation.
Low‐quality evidence shows an effect of interventions on increasing programme enrolment (19 comparisons; risk ratio (RR) 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13 to 1.42). Meta‐regression revealed that the intervention deliverer (nurse or allied healthcare provider; P = 0.02) and the delivery format (face‐to‐face; P = 0.01) were influential in increasing enrolment. Low‐quality evidence shows interventions to increase adherence were effective (nine comparisons; standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.38, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.55), particularly when they were delivered remotely, such as in home‐based programs (SMD 0.56, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.76). Moderate‐quality evidence shows interventions to increase programme completion were also effective (eight comparisons; RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.25), but those applied in multi‐centre studies were less effective than those given in single‐centre studies, leading to questions regarding generalisability. A moderate level of statistical heterogeneity across intervention studies reflects heterogeneity in intervention approaches. There was no evidence of small‐study bias for enrolment (insufficient studies to test for this in the other outcomes).
With regard to secondary outcomes, no studies reported on harms associated with the interventions. Only two studies reported costs. In terms of equity, trialists tested interventions designed to improve utilisation among women and older patients. Evidence is insufficient for quantitative assessment of whether women‐tailored programmes were associated with increased utilisation, and studies that assess motivating women are needed. For older participants, again while quantitative assessment could not be undertaken, peer navigation may improve enrolment.
Authors' conclusions
Interventions may increase cardiac rehabilitation enrolment, adherence and completion; however the quality of evidence was low to moderate due to heterogeneity of the interventions used, among other factors. Effects on enrolment were larger in studies targeting healthcare providers, training nurses, or allied healthcare providers to intervene face‐to‐face; effects on adherence were larger in studies that tested remote interventions. More research is needed, particularly to discover the best ways to increase programme completion.
A policy statement recommending that healthcare providers (HCPs) encourage cardiac patients to enroll in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) was recently endorsed by 23 medical societies. This study ...describes the development and evaluation of a guideline implementation tool.
A stepwise multiple-method study was conducted. Inpatient cardiac HCPs were recruited between September 2018-May 2019 from two academic hospitals in Toronto, Canada. First, HCPs were observed during discharge discussions with patients to determine needs. Results informed selection and development of the tool by the multidisciplinary planning committee, namely an online course. It was pilot-tested with target users through a think-aloud protocol with subsequent semi-structured interviews, until saturation was achieved. Results informed refinement before launching the course. Finally, to evaluate impact, HCPs were surveyed to test whether knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy and practice changed from before watching the course, through to post-course and 1 month later.
Seven nurses (71.4% female) were observed. Five (62.5%) initiated dialogue about CR, which lasted on average 12 s. Patients asked questions, which HCPs could not answer. The planning committee decided to develop an online course to reach inpatient cardiac HCPs, to educate them on how to encourage patients to participate in CR at the bedside. The course was pilot-tested with 5 HCPs (60.0% nurse-practitioners). Revisions included providing evidence of CR benefits and clarification regarding pre-CR stress test screening. HCPs did not remember the key points to convey, so a downloadable handout was embedded for the point-of-care. The course was launched, with the surveys. Twenty-four HCPs (83.3% nurses) completed the pre-course survey, 21 (87.5%) post, and 9 (37.5%) 1 month later. CR knowledge increased from pre (mean = 2.71 ± 0.95/5) to post-course (mean = 4.10 ± 0.62; p ≤ .001), as did self-efficacy in answering patient CR questions (mean = 2.29 ± 0.95/5 pre and 3.67 ± 0.58 post; p ≤ 0.001). CR attitudes were significantly more positive post-course (mean = 4.13 ± 0.95/5 pre and 4.62 ± 0.59 post; p ≤ 0.05). With regard to practice, 8 (33.3%) HCPs reported providing patients CR handouts pre-course at least sometimes or more, and 6 (66.7%) 1 month later.
Preliminary results support broader dissemination, and hence a genericized version has been created ( http://learnonthego.ca/Courses/promoting_patient_participation_in_CR_2020/promoting_patient_participation_in_CR_2020EN/story_html5.html ). Continuing education credits have been secured.
Cardiac Rehabilitation (CR) is a recommendation in international clinical practice guidelines given its' benefits, however use is suboptimal. The purpose of this position statement was to translate ...evidence on interventions that increase CR enrolment and adherence into implementable recommendations.
The writing panel was constituted by representatives of societies internationally concerned with preventive cardiology, and included disciplines that would be implementing the recommendations. Patient partners served, as well as policy-makers. The statement was developed in accordance with AGREE II, among other guideline checklists. Recommendations were based on our update of the Cochrane review on interventions to promote patient utilization of CR. These were circulated to panel members, who were asked to rate each on a 7-point Likert scale in terms of scientific acceptability, actionability, and feasibility of assessment. A web call was convened to achieve consensus and confirm strength of the recommendations (based on GRADE). The draft underwent external review and public comment.
The 3 drafted recommendations were that to increase enrolment, healthcare providers, particularly nurses (strong), should promote CR to patients face-to-face (strong), and that to increase adherence part of CR could be delivered remotely (weak). Ratings for the 3 recommendations were 5.95 ± 0.69 (mean ± standard deviation), 5.33 ± 1.12 and 5.64 ± 1.08, respectively.
Interventions can significantly increase utilization of CR, and hence should be widely applied. We call upon cardiac care institutions to implement these strategies to augment CR utilization, and to ensure CR programs are adequately resourced to serve enrolling patients and support them to complete programs.
•Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is grossly under-utilized, despite its' proven benefits.•A recently-updated Cochrane review established interventions to increase use.•These were translated into implementable recommendations, using best practices.•Implementation tools include an online course to educate inpatient care providers.•Patient preferences and barriers should be considered to optimize use.
Abstract Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a proven model of secondary prevention. Indicated cardiac conditions for CR are well established, and participation of these patients results in significantly ...lower mortality and morbidity when compared with usual care. There are approximately 170 CR programs in Canada, which varies widely by province. There is a grossly insufficient capacity to treat all patients with cardiac indications in Canada and beyond. The density of CR services is about half that in the United States, at 1 program per 208,823 inhabitants or 1 program per 7779 patients with cardiac disease. Despite the Canadian Cardiovascular Society's target of 85% referral for CR for cardiac inpatients with the appropriate indications, significantly fewer patients are referred for CR. Moreover, certain patient groups—such as women, ethnocultural minorities, and those of low socioeconomic status—are less likely to access CR, despite greater need because of poorer outcomes. CR appears to be reaching a healthier population that is perhaps more adherent to secondary prevention recommendations and hence in less need of the limited CR spots available. The reasons for CR underuse are well established and include factors at patient, referring provider, CR program, and health system levels. A Cochrane review has established some effective interventions to increase CR use, and these must be implemented more broadly. We must advocate for CR reimbursement. Finally, we must reallocate our CR resources to patients with the greatest need. This may involve risk stratification, with subsequent allocation of lower-risk patients to a more widely available, lower-cost, and effective alternative model of CR.
Evidence proves that health care providers should promote cardiac rehabilitation (CR) to patients face-to-face to increase CR enrollment. An online course was designed to promote this at the bedside; ...it is evaluated herein in terms of reach, effect on knowledge, attitudes, discussion self-efficacy and practices, and satisfaction.
Design was observational, one-group pre- and post-test. Some demographics were requested from learners taking all language versions of the 20-min course: English, Portuguese, French, Spanish, and simplified Chinese, available at: https://globalcardiacrehab.com/CR-Utilization. Investigator-generated items in the pre- and post-test and evaluation survey administered using Google Forms were based on Kirkpatrick's training evaluation model.
The course was initiated by 522 learners from 33 of 203 (16%) countries; most commonly female (n = 341, 65%) nurses (n = 180, 34%) from high-income countries (n = 259, 57%) completing the English (n = 296, 57%) and Chinese (n = 108, 21%) versions. A total of 414 (79%) learners completed the post-test and 302 (58%) completed the evaluation. Median CR attitudes were 5 of 5 on the Likert scale at pre-test, suggesting some selection bias. Mean CR knowledge (7.22 ± 2.14/10), discussion self-efficacy (3.86 ± 0.85/5), and practice (4.13 ± 1.11/5) significantly improved after completion of the course (all P < .001). Satisfaction was high regardless of language version (4.44 ± 0.64/5; P = .593).
This free, open-access course is effective in increasing CR knowledge, self-efficacy, and encouragement practices among participating inpatient cardiac providers, with high satisfaction. While testing impact on actual CR use is needed, it should be more broadly disseminated to increase reach, in an effort to increase patient enrollment in CR, to reduce morbidity and mortality.
PDF
