Key result
Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation moderately improves dyspnoea in HF patients.
Why the study?
Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation is recommended for heart failure, but its effects on dyspnoea had not been systematically reviewed, possibly due to gaps in dyspnoea assessment.
Does exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation improve dyspnoea in patients with heart failure?
Meta-Analysis (n=766)
Does exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation improve dyspnoea in patients with heart failure?
Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation moderately improves dyspnoea in heart failure patients, particularly in younger, non-hospitalised individuals and those in low-intensity or multimodal programmes.
Supports exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for dyspnoea relief in heart failure; reinforces Level 1 evidence from this meta-analysis.
Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (EBCR) programmes are strongly recommended to enhance exercise capacity and quality of life in heart failure (HF). However, their effects on dyspnoea have not been systematically reviewed, possibly due to the knowledge gap in the assessment of dyspnoea. The aim of this study was to recognise the dyspnoea tool used in HF for the EBCR trial, assess the effects of EBCR on dyspnoea and identify which patient characteristics and FITT parameters (Frequency, Intensity, Time and Type) are associated with better outcomes. A review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials following the PRISMA guideline were performed, including fifteen studies ( n = 766 participants). Up to 8 dyspnoea measurement instruments were identified in the studies. EBCR showed a moderate effect size on dyspnoea ( d = 0.69, 95% CI 0.54–0.84). Larger effects were seen in patients < 65 years ( d = 0.77, 95% CI 0.54–0.99) and in non-hospitalised patients ( d = 0.735, 95% CI 0.550–0.921). Greater effects were observed for low-intensity ( d = 0.79, 95% CI 0.44–1.15) and multimodal programmes ( d = 1.12, 95% CI 0.47–1.77). Programmes with three sessions per week and ≥12 weeks were the most common. Findings were limited due to the varying dyspnoea scales, highlighting the need for standardised assessment in HF. Los programas de rehabilitación cardíaca basada en ejercicio (RC-BE) cuentan con una sólida recomendación para mejorar la capacidad funcional y la calidad de vida en pacientes con insuficiencia cardíaca. Sin embargo, sus efectos sobre la disnea no han sido revisados de forma sistemática posiblemente debido a la brecha de conocimiento sobre medidas de disnea. El objetivo de este estudio fue reconocer los instrumentos de evaluación de la disnea en insuficiencia cardíaca durante los programas de RC-BE, evaluar los efectos de la RC-BE sobre la disnea e identificar qué características del paciente y parámetros FITT (Frecuencia, Intensidad, Tiempo y Tipo) están asociados con mejores resultados. Se realizó una revisión y metaanálisis de ensayos controlados aleatorizados siguiendo la guía PRISMA, que incluyó 15 estudios (n = 766 participantes). Hasta 8 instrumentos de evaluación de la disnea fueron identificados. La RC-BE mostró un tamaño del efecto moderado sobre la disnea (d = 0,69, IC 95% 0,54 a 0,84). Se observaron efectos mayores en pacientes < 65 años (d = 0,77, IC 95% 0,54 a 0,99) y en pacientes no hospitalizados (d = 0,735, IC 95% 0,550 a 0,921). Los efectos fueron mayores en programas de baja intensidad (d = 0,79, IC 95% 0,44 a 1,15) y multimodales (d = 1,12, IC 95% 0,47 a 1,77). Los programas con 3 sesiones por semana y una duración ≥ 12 semanas fueron los más comunes. Los hallazgos estuvieron limitados por la variabilidad de las escalas de disnea, lo que destaca la necesidad de una evaluación estandarizada en la insuficiencia cardíaca.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
García-Conejo et al. (2025) conducted a meta-analysis in Heart failure (n=766). Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation was evaluated on Dyspnoea (d = 0.69, 95% CI 0.54-0.84). Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation showed a moderate effect on improving dyspnoea in heart failure patients (d = 0.69; 95% CI 0.54-0.84).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: