Transforming Exercise-based Cardiac Rehabilitation Programs Into Secondary Prevention Centers: A National Imperative

Cardiac rehabilitation programs should be transforming themselves from cardiac exercise facilities to comprehensive risk-reduction centers. Exercise will always have a place in cardiac rehabilitation. Postcoronary event patients who participate in exercise rehabilitation enjoy lower mortality rates and improved physical and psychological function. 1–3 Furthermore, cardiac rehabilitation exercise is a crucial intervention for older CHD patients striving to maintain physical independence. 4 However, the clinical benefits of exercise can be greatly amplified by strict attention to the measurement and treatment of coronary risk factors and by the attainment of well-defined risk factor goals. 5–9 Individual rehabilitation programs will need to carefully and thoughtfully develop risk factor modules and practice ongoing quality improvement with collection of outcomes data. The days of blindly applying a single exercise intervention over a 36-session period to all patients are all but over. Third-party payors, patients, and referring physicians are appropriately expecting improved clinical outcomes over a relatively short-term follow-up period (2–4 years). These goals can only be attained with a comprehensive, active, and participatory approach to cardiac risk reduction. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE Cardiac rehabilitation programs were established in the 1960s and 1970s when hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarction and surgical revascularization were prolonged and deconditioning was extreme. 10 As inpatient reambulation extended into the outpatient period, closely supervised, electrocardiographically monitored exercise programs developed, with physicians on-site to respond to potential cardiac emergencies. The focus was almost exclusively on exercise. These programs were shown to improve functional capacity for patients with coronary heart disease (CHD), and combined randomized-controlled trials (analyzed by meta-analysis) demonstrated a mortality benefit. 1,2 It has since been demonstrated that the acute risk of cardiac rehabilitation exercise is exceedingly low. 11–13 Home-exercise programs have been developed and appear to be safe for low-and moderate-risk patients. 14,15 Cardiac rehabilitation participation criteria have expanded to include patients with percutaneous coronary interventions, recent valvular heart surgery, chronic heart failure, heart transplantation, peripheral arterial disease, and the elderly. 16 By the early 1990s, the benefits of risk factor modification on clinical outcomes in patients with CHD were demonstrated. Randomized-controlled clinical trials that included combinations of exercise, low-fat diets 7,17–19 and lipid-lowering therapy 7,20–22 documented a slowing of the atherosclerotic process and a marked decrease in cardiac events and cardiac hospitalizations. The Stanford Coronary Risk Intervention Project (SCRIP) model is particularly relevant to outpatient cardiac rehabilitation as it provides an example of multi-risk intervention that can be emulated in the cardiac rehabilitation setting. 7,23 Physicians in clinical practice have not been particularly effective in assisting CHD patients to attain well-defined risk factor goals. For example, recent studies have documented that only 9% to 25% of CHD patients in practice settings have met the NCEP guidelines for lipid management 24–29 (Table 1). A significant percentage of patients are not taking preventive medications that have been shown to improve long-term outcomes. 8 In many settings it has been demonstrated that a systematic approach to the measurement and treatment of coronary risk factors is required to attain risk factor goals. The “art” of medicine is less effective than systematic screening and well-defined treatment algorithms.Table 1: UNDERTREATMENT OF HYPERLIPIDEMIA IN PATIENTS WITH CORONARY HEART DISEASECardiac rehabilitation programs and preventive cardiology clinics need to embrace the challenge of secondary prevention. It is our only viable future. We, furthermore, believe that exercise-only programs will find themselves excluded from reimbursement plans for the chronic care of CHD. Certainly, there is a role for exercise to improve functional capacity for the prevention and treatment of cardiac disability and for its preventive effects at the level of the coronary vasculature. 1,2,30–32 However, third-party payors eventually will limit on-site, monitored exercise to all but the highest risk and least functional patients. A system of care that systematically reduces risk in CHD patients by defining and treating hyperlipidemia, by offering successful weight-loss programs and nutritional counseling, by optimizing hypertensive and diabetic care, by recognizing and treating depression, and by optimizing preventive pharmacologic therapies, is the most likely system to be accepted as the standard of care. The concept of cardiac rehabilitation as the site for comprehensive risk-reduction has been recognized by the Cardiac Rehabilitation Clinical Practice Guidelines 16 under its byline “Cardiac Rehabilitation as Secondary Prevention.” The American Heart Association and the Cardiac Rehabilitation Certification program of the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation also promote it. 5 The Core Components for Cardiac Rehabilitation/Secondary Prevention were recently published jointly in Circulation5 and in the Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation6 and need to be widely embraced (Figure 1).Figure 1.: Risk factor goals (data from Balady et al 5,6). LDL, low-density lipoprotein; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; BP, blood pressure; BMI, body mass index; HBA 1C , glycosylated hemoglobin.How does an exercise-only cardiac rehabilitation program transform to become a comprehensive risk-reduction center? The key components of making a successful transition from an exercise-only program to a comprehensive secondary prevention program are: the adoption of the case-management system of patient management, and the gradual implementation of “risk factor modules.” CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM OF CARE Case management is the cornerstone of multiple risk reduction and provides a structural framework for the organization of cardiac rehabilitation programs. It involves the coordination of risk-reduction care for clusters of patients by a single individual, most commonly a nurse or exercise physiologist, with appropriate medical supervision. The inter-relatedness of coronary risk factors demands an integrated approach to management. While lifestyle skills will remain the foundation of risk factor interventions, providing both important metabolic and psychosocial benefits, there also is an important role for concomitant physician-directed pharmacologic therapy. It is in the application of behavioral modification principles and treatment algorithms that case management has been shown to be a safe and effective method of providing multiple risk reduction interventions. Case management for the treatment of CHD is based on: □ Screening to identify persons with disease □ Risk stratification and triage of those identified □ Assignment of individual to a case-manager □ Institution of intensive risk-reduction interventions based on clinical practice guidelines □ Medical surveillance of safety, efficacy, and adherence to risk reduction efforts □ Measurement of medical outcomes and patient satisfaction □ Systematic follow-up and institution of change in therapies as indicated Medical care in the United States in the 21st century is hampered by reimbursement issues, lack of continuity in medical insurance coverage, lack of continuity of healthcare providers, limited time with healthcare providers, and a focus on isolated “chief complaint” physician office visits. On the other hand, disease management is more effective than standard medical care because it is based on integrated approaches and services. Case management provides a model for coronary heart disease management by integrating patient, family, environment, lifestyle, and community. Several recent studies document the relative ineffectiveness of standard physician office visits on the management of CHD risk factors. 24–29 Sueta et al 24 evaluated the degree of treatment of hyperlipidemia in patients with CHD. The authors audited medical charts in 140 predominately cardiovascular practices in the United States. A total of 58,890 outpatient records were reviewed; 83% of patients were diagnosed with CHD. All patients reviewed had at least two office visits recorded in a 12-month period between July 1, 1994 and October 1, 1996. This study revealed a large screening gap with 56% of patients not having a recent LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) documented, 61% of screened patients not receiving appropriate lipid-lowering therapy, and only 25% of patients at the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP II) goal of ≤ 100 mg/dL 30 (Figure 2). Patients with a documented LDL-C in their charts were four times more likely to receive lipid-lowering therapy.Figure 2.: Office-based lipid management in coronary artery disease. Aggregate data n = 48,586. Adapted from Sueta et al. 24The Lipid Treatment Assessment Project (L-TAP) similarly evaluated the percentages of dyslipidemic patients receiving lipid-lowering therapy and achieving LDL-C goals. In this study, Pearson et al 27 targeted the practice patterns of primary care physician where patients with dyslipidemia were regularly seen. Participating physicians completed a survey regarding their own demographic status, professional characteristics, and practice profiles. Awareness and adherence to NCEP II guidelines also were assessed. In L-TAP, the primary outcome measured was the success rate of appropriately screened and stratified patients reaching NCEP II LDL-C levels 9 (Table 1). These results demonstrate that in primary care, as in specialty practice, a large gap exists in the achievement of LDL-C goals as only 18% of CHD patients had reached an LDL-C of < 100 mg/dL. These studies are pivotal in that they demonstrate clearly the need for improved models for healthcare delivery. In contrast, the benefits of case management have been documented in several clinical settings. The Butterworth Health System in Grand Rapids, Michigan reorganized their cardiac rehabilitation program to focus on improvement of long-term patient outcomes using a case-management model. 33 The new model included the use of referral pathways, education sessions, and intervention by social workers as indicated. In addition, they added regular phone call follow-up to assess effectiveness of risk-reduction interventions. At 1 year, 77% of patients were on lipid-lowering medications, 78% reported exercising at least 3 days per week, and 66% of prior smokers reported smoking cessation. Although these results are based on self-report, the model of care deserves close attention. Two key studies, the MULTIFIT Study 34 and the SCRIP study 7 demonstrated the powerful impact of case management. MULTIFIT is a case-management program for men and women hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction in Northern California. This study randomized patients to special risk reduction intervention by nurse case managers versus usual care. The special intervention patients received education and counseling regarding smoking cessation, regular physical activity, and nutrition. Medical management, such as lipid-lowering therapy, was instituted as indicated for risk factors not controlled by lifestyle change. Much of the intervention was mediated via phone and mail contact. The special intervention group showed greater improvement at 6 months and 1 year in functional capacity, rates of smoking cessation and changes in LDL-C compared with the usual care group. This case management system subsequently was adopted by the Kaiser Permanente Health Care System. The SCRIP study was a randomized-controlled clinical trial funded by the National Institutes of Health to evaluate the efficacy of physician-directed, nurse coordinated multi-risk factor intervention, in men and women with CHD. 7 Outcome measures included quantitative coronary arteriography, risk factor measures, rehospitalization rates, and rates of recurrent coronary events. This study used nurse case-managers to supervise and coordinate care. The case managers worked with a team of nutritionists, psychologists, and physicians to provide clinical and lifestyle interventions, striving to attain nationally recognized goals for risk factor reduction. 8 The study was conducted over a 4-year period and demonstrated both clinical and angiographic benefits (Table 2). The intervention group demonstrated a reduction of hospitalizations and clinical coronary events. Angiographic benefits included both less progression and greater stabilization of plaque in the intervention group compared with the usual care group.Table 2: STANFORD CORONARY RISK INTERVENTION PROJECT (SCRIP) RESULTS 7Fonarow et al 35 recently published the results of the Cardiac Hospitalization Atherosclerosis Management Program (CHAMP). In this study, the investigators evaluated the efficacy of a case management approach to discharge planning for persons admitted to the UCLA Medical Center with a diagnosis of CAD or other vascular diseases (Figure 3). The study followed a case management approach emphasizing the appropriate use of aspirin, cholesterol lowering agents, beta-adrenergic blocking agents, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I). These interventions were applied in conjunction with outpatient exercise, nutrition, and smoking cessation counseling. At completion of the study, utilization of beta blockers, ACE-I, aspirin, and lipid-lowering agents were all significantly increased (Tables 3 and 4). There also was a significant increase in the percentage of patients achieving a LDL-C ≤ 100 mg/dL (58% versus 6%, P < 0.001) and a reduction in recurrent myocardial infarction and 1-year mortality.Table 3: CHAMP MEDICATION UTILIZATION RATES AT DISCHARGETable 4: CHAMP MEDICATION UTILIZATION RATES AND LDL LEVELS AT 1 YEAR POST-HOSPITAL DISCHARGEFigure 3.: Cardiac Hospitalization Atherosclerosis Management Program algorithm for patients with evident atherosclerosis. Reprinted from Fonarow et al. 35 © 2001, with permission from Excerpta Medical Inc.In summary, these data support the efficacy of the case-management model of healthcare regarding long-term adherence to risk-reduction efforts both in the acute and chronic care setting. Case management must be instituted in existing cardiac rehabilitation programs, where, for example, selected qualified staff are each assigned specific patients to serve as their case manager. Assignments can be made to individual case managers on an alternating basis as consecutive patients are admitted to the program, or on the basis of staff specialization, disease severity or patient complexity. Risk Factor Modules From the point of view of implementing multi-risk reduction in the cardiac rehabilitation setting, modules of care need to be organized for each individual risk factor. The case-manager can then refer individual patients to selected modules based upon their baseline screening values. Beyond screening for a risk factor, setting up a module requires an integrated system of care that includes staffing, an education component, counseling of lifestyle interventions including nutrition and exercise, with long-term follow-up of the risk factor measure. For selected risk factors such as hyperlipidemia or and of pharmacologic therapy by the medical in with the referring physician is also a Exercise has relatively effects on the lipid in CHD patients. The most is an improvement of on the of to or an increase of 3 to 4 mg/dL over as as a While this in an improvement of this using the pharmacologic in CHD patients with an isolated was recently with a decrease in coronary events over a Cardiac rehabilitation exercise also is with a decrease in levels for patients baseline are mg/dL. 35 On the other hand, in the of significant LDL-C effects of exercise are counseling and change can in LDL-C that not most patients with CHD and LDL-C will need to be with pharmacologic lipid-lowering agents to lipid lifestyle measures are The cardiac rehabilitation baseline screening should include a lipid coronary revascularization or at least 1 an acute coronary The rehabilitation program should then participate in lipid goals. This includes both nutritional counseling or when and pharmacologic therapy. lipid-lowering algorithms lipid-lowering therapy, 9 the medical of the program, in with the primary should lipid-lowering therapy. such a model in a quality improvement at the of the application of appropriate lipid-lowering therapy was with a with the intervention group significantly lower lipid values. At cardiac rehabilitation a lipid should be and of therapy and long-term goal attainment can be is in cardiac rehabilitation with rates of mass from to mass is in to of patients. In CHD patients, is with of lipid II and in CHD patients as a multi-risk Lipid improve with in blood and In the cardiac rehabilitation setting, does not with exercise A targeted intervention is A based reduction program has been and into the cardiac rehabilitation setting. It is in to 16 group and the behavioral of goals per a 1 per social and prevention It is coordinated by a or a cardiac rehabilitation At the of such a program, coordinated by a nurse has in an of 9 to 10 over an period with a significant decrease in cholesterol Cardiac rehabilitation programs should in or an effective program for patients as of the cardiac cardiology patients be to management programs or does not in benefit. While physicians an important role in patients to they not the have the to on a systematic is with coronary artery disease, in to of patients with myocardial infarction in large clinical has been reported to be in to of consecutive patients in cardiac rehabilitation programs. The of in to of is not However, the cardiac rehabilitation staff can with the primary care physician to evaluate and this important risk factor. medical includes a focus on and and of physical and also should be reviewed and A percentage of CHD patients will be taking beta-adrenergic blocking agents or medications, to their preventive 8 is at least in most CHD patients to cardiac rehabilitation. The physical for patients with should include the □ Two or more blood by with the patient or and for at least □ in the are the should be Cardiac rehabilitation program staff can greatly the primary care physician in the treatment and surveillance of patients with are the foundation for treatment of and pharmacologic therapy when studies have demonstrated that regular physical the of In hypertensive men short-term physical blood for 8 to exercise, and blood is lower on exercise than on In hypertensive physical for 16 to a decrease in blood is reduction in In addition, there is a significant decrease in as early as 16 the of exercise. The treatment goals for are by and in adherence to long-term both lifestyle and pharmacologic therapy, has been identified as the for of blood Cardiac rehabilitation provides patient education and support at patient of specific therapies and treatment the interventions to lifestyle, and or other social improve long-term adherence to treatment and blood has effects on both and These include increased to of by the of use more than and Patients with in cardiac rehabilitation programs special particularly they are taking or The patient should include regarding and of This is important particularly when is of the treatment The and of of are important to Patients should be regarding the of exercise on blood levels and the of up to several the exercise and treatment of should be reviewed with diabetic patients. diabetic patients are to and that with or be by exercise, the medical should include an of the lower Patients should be to and exercise. levels should be and exercise to provide an of that to exercise. levels of < and mg/dL should exercise at that The results of blood the need for a modification of the smoking cessation is with a marked decrease in coronary event rates in coronary patients. The results with smoking cessation a coronary event have been with a intervention that place in the acute The intervention is at prevention and includes of behavioral These include with of when and long-term contact. At 1 year, in study, cessation rates were significantly increased from in to 61% with the In the outpatient cardiac rehabilitation setting, the of smokers and who is the of the treatment a care approach to smoking cessation. These □ a regarding the of □ the patient is to and providing making this □ the method such as a group program or individual counseling □ for with such as increased or increased by behavioral □ therapies as indicated □ a to the □ support as such as regular exercise, of and providing a to social support □ follow-up to support prevention and to The of cardiac rehabilitation programs to and social for a and more effective of achieving successful smoking cessation than in an office setting. Assessment of psychosocial is to successful rehabilitation of the cardiac of should the □ there of □ is the of or and their □ the patient the of a heart or is the patient to in to of infarction patients. levels of are with increased medical and patients myocardial infarction are more likely to social more and are less likely to to than those who are not The that to medical outcomes are not but be in to increased and The have been shown to increase the risk for myocardial and cardiac It should be that participation in cardiac rehabilitation with a management of is with an decrease in and improved clinical particularly for patients with baseline the of and treating in cardiac patients is recognized as an of comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation and secondary prevention. be in that such as also are of cardiac disease. In addition, many patients be to and many healthcare be to such screening should be as of the for patients cardiac prevention programs. These should include an patient in and as as a of should be A of and are also to in this screening These include the is a on a of 10 is at least to and the a where a of 5 significant is then a treatment must be This should be in with the primary healthcare with psychologists, or other behavioral should be to with and management of these patients, particularly not improve participation in group exercise and management. and Exercise will always have a place in cardiac but the challenge is to in place effective programs for risk factor management. Individual programs will need to carefully and thoughtfully develop risk factor modules and practice ongoing quality improvement with collection of outcomes data. referring and third-party payors are expecting improved clinical outcomes over a relatively short-term period of to 4 These goals can only be attained each and program on risk factor goals with a comprehensive and participatory approach to CHD management. The authors for