What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: RCT. Population: Chronic Heart Disease (n=200). Intervention: Psychological support strategies vs. Standard care. Primary outcome: Lipid profiles and cardiac imaging.

What question did this study set out to answer?

This study aims to assess the effects of psychological support on clinical outcomes and quality of life in patients with chronic heart disease.

March 12, 2026Open Access

The impact of psychological support strategies on clinical outcomes and quality of life in patients with chronic heart disease: a randomized controlled trial

Key Result

Psychological support strategies significantly improved LDL cholesterol levels, reducing them by 10 mg/dL compared to standard care in patients with chronic heart disease.

Key Points

This study aims to assess the effects of psychological support on clinical outcomes and quality of life in patients with chronic heart disease.
Conducted a randomized controlled trial with 200 chronic heart disease patients.
Patients were allocated to an intervention group receiving psychological support and educational sessions or a control group receiving standard care.
Primary outcomes included changes in lipid profiles and cardiac imaging after 12 months.
Secondary measures assessed health-related quality of life, medication adherence, and lifestyle behaviors at 6 and 12 months.
Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle.
Intervention group showed significantly better lipid outcomes at 12 months.
Lower LDL cholesterol (90 mg/dL vs. 100 mg/dL) and higher HDL cholesterol (50 mg/dL vs. 45 mg/dL) were observed.
Improved cardiac imaging results included higher left ventricular ejection fraction (56.2% vs. 54.1%) and lower left atrial volume index (28 mL/m² vs. 32 mL/m²).
Quality-of-life scores were higher in the intervention group across all SF-36 domains.
Medication adherence was greater (91% vs. 75%) in the intervention group.

Study Design

Type

RCT (n=200)

Blinding

Blinded

Randomization

1:1

Multicenter

Structured PICO

Does a structured multidisciplinary program including psychological support improve lipid profiles and cardiac imaging outcomes in adults with chronic heart disease?

Population

200 adults aged 40 to 75 years with a documented history of chronic heart disease (previous myocardial infarction, stable angina, or heart failure). Excluded: terminal illness, cognitive impairment preventing informed consent, or concurrent participation in another clinical trial.

Intervention

Structured, multidisciplinary program lasting 12 months including monthly 60-minute health education sessions, personalized dietary counseling (Mediterranean diet), individualized exercise programs (≥150 minutes of aerobic activity per week plus resistance training), and biweekly psychological support based on Motivational Interviewing and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy.

Comparator

Standard care, including regular medical follow-up, routine lifestyle advice, and access to general healthcare services, without structured psychological or behavioral interventions. Both groups continued to receive standard cardiology care.

Outcome

Changes in laboratory values (LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, HbA1c, serum potassium, and C-Reactive Protein) and cardiac imaging outcomes (left ventricular ejection fraction and left atrial volume index) at 1-year follow-up.surrogate

Integrating structured psychological support and lifestyle counseling into routine cardiology care significantly improves lipid profiles, cardiac function, and quality of life in patients with chronic heart disease.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 90% vs 100%

Abstract

As chronic heart disease (CHD) continues to rise globally, attention is shifting beyond medical interventions to the psychological dimensions of care. This study examined whether structured psychological support, integrated within a multidisciplinary framework, could enhance clinical outcomes, promote healthier lifestyles, and improve quality of life among CHD patients. In a randomized controlled trial, 200 patients with CHD were allocated to either an intervention group—receiving psychological support, educational sessions, dietary counseling, and personalized physical activity—or a control group receiving standard care. The primary outcomes were changes in lipid profiles and cardiac imaging after 12 months. Secondary measures included cardiac events, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), medication adherence, and lifestyle behaviors assessed at 6 and 12 months. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. The intervention group demonstrated better lipid outcomes at 12 months significantly, including lower LDL cholesterol (90 ± 25 vs. 100 ± 30 mg/dL) and higher HDL cholesterol (50 ± 12 vs. 45 ± 10 mg/dL). Cardiac imaging also improved, with higher left ventricular ejection fraction (56.2 ± 6.1% vs. 54.1 ± 6.3%) and lower left atrial volume index (28 ± 7 vs. 32 ± 8 mL/m²). Quality-of-life scores were higher across all SF-36 domains (e.g., mental health: 78 ± 10 vs. 64 ± 15), and psychological outcomes were more favorable, with lower depression (5.4 ± 2.1 vs. 7.8 ± 2.5) and anxiety scores (4.9 ± 1.9 vs. 7.2 ± 2.3). Medication adherence was also higher (91 ± 6 vs. 75 ± 13), and functional capacity improved (390 ± 45 vs. 350 ± 60 m on the 6-minute walk test). Embedding psychological support within cardiology care delivers potential benefits in lipid regulation, cardiac performance, and quality of life for CHD patients. These findings highlight the critical role of integrated, patient-centred approaches in optimizing long-term outcomes in cardiac care.

Bookmark

View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Zhang et al. (Mon,) conducted a rct in Chronic Heart Disease (n=200). Psychological support strategies vs. Standard care was evaluated on Lipid profiles and cardiac imaging. Psychological support strategies significantly improved LDL cholesterol levels, reducing them by 10 mg/dL compared to standard care in patients with chronic heart disease.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69b2588496eeacc4fcec839e https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1186/s13019-026-03858-8

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

Bookmark

View Full Paper