Key result
Higher county Social Vulnerability Index linked to ~1% fewer cardiac rehabilitation facilities per percentile increase.
Why the study?
There is a lack of research evaluating geographic disparities in access to cardiac rehabilitation among socially vulnerable communities.
Cross-Sectional (n=3,113)
Relative Risk: 0.988 (95% CI 0.985–0.99)
p-value: p=<0.001
Socially vulnerable communities, particularly in rural areas, experience significantly worse geographic access to cardiac rehabilitation facilities in the United States.
Social vulnerability linked to fewer cardiac rehab facilities; leaves open whether interventions targeting SVI can improve access in vulnerable counties.
BACKGROUND: There is a dearth of research examining geographic disparities in access to cardiac rehabilitation (CR). We evaluated whether disparities in geographic access to CR exist among socially vulnerable communities, using the Social Vulnerability Index (SVI). METHODS: Among 3113 US counties, we investigated relationships between SVI and number of hospitals with CR per 100 000 adults, modeled with SVI as a linear variable, and SVI and distance to the nearest county with CR facilities, modeled using spline terms for SVI. We used multivariable zero-inflated negative binomial regression modeling adjusted for county population, CR eligibility, percentage without health insurance, metropolitan status, and availability of existing health care infrastructure. We explored whether these relationships changed in the context of rurality. RESULTS: <0.001). CONCLUSION: More socially vulnerable communities experienced worse geographic access to CR facilities. This access disparity intensified in rural communities. Our findings call for reducing barriers to CR access among socially vulnerable and rural communities, potentially through virtual or hybrid models of CR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2025) conducted a cross-sectional in Access to Cardiac Rehabilitation (n=3,113). Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) vs. Lower social vulnerability was evaluated on Number of hospitals with cardiac rehabilitation per 100,000 adults (IRR 0.988, 95% CI 0.985-0.990, p=<0.001). Each 1-percentile increase in county Social Vulnerability Index was associated with a 1.2% decrease in the expected number of cardiac rehabilitation hospitals per 100,000 adults (IRR 0.988) and a 2.2% increase in the odds of lacking a facility entirely.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: