Key result
Community-level distress linked to ~59% lower CR participation despite similar mortality benefits.
Why the study?
Disparities in cardiac rehabilitation participation are well documented, but the role of community-level distress is poorly understood.
Does cardiac rehabilitation use improve clinical outcomes in Medicare beneficiaries after inpatient coronary revascularization across different levels of community distress?
Population
Medicare beneficiaries undergoing inpatient coronary revascularization between July 2016 and December 2018
Comparison
Distressed Community Index quintiles and cardiac rehabilitation use vs non-use
Design
Retrospective cohort study
Follow-up
1 year
Authors
Loading...
CR uptake remains lower in distressed communities despite similar benefits; leaves open optimal strategies to improve access and equity.
Cohort
Yes
Does cardiac rehabilitation use improve clinical outcomes in Medicare beneficiaries after inpatient coronary revascularization across different levels of community distress?
Effect estimate: OR 0.41 (95% CI 0.40-0.42)
p-value: p=<0.001
Cardiac rehabilitation participation is associated with significant reductions in mortality and hospitalizations after coronary revascularization, with clinical benefits universally observed regardless of community-level distress.
Thompson et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in inpatient coronary revascularization. Community-level distress vs. Prosperous communities was evaluated on Cardiac rehabilitation participation (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.40-0.42, p=<0.001). Community-level distress was associated with significantly lower cardiac rehabilitation participation (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.40-0.42), though CR use provided similar mortality reductions across all groups.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: