Key result
A behavioral medicine intervention added to routine cardiac rehabilitation did not significantly improve physical fitness compared to routine care, but increased exercise adherence (31% vs 19%).
Why the study?
Despite the beneficial effects of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation, adherence is low among patients with coronary artery disease.
Does a behavioral medicine intervention in physiotherapy added to routine exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation improve physical fitness in patients with coronary artery disease?
RCT (n=170)
1:1
No
Does a behavioral medicine intervention in physiotherapy added to routine exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation improve physical fitness in patients with coronary artery disease?
Adding a behavioral medicine intervention to routine exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation did not significantly improve physical fitness at 4 months compared to routine care alone, though it may improve adherence.
PURPOSE: Despite beneficial effects, adherence to exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (exCR) is low in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). The aim of this study was to investigate adherence to and the effects of a behavioral medicine intervention in physiotherapy (BMIP) added to routine exCR care on the primary outcome of physical fitness compared with routine exCR care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a randomized, controlled trial, 170 patients with CAD (136 men), mean age 62.3 (7.9) years, were included at a Swedish university hospital. Patients were randomized 1:1 to routine exCR care (RC) or to a BMIP added to routine exCR care for four months, with a long-term follow-up at 12 months. The outcome assessment included submaximal aerobic exercise capacity, muscle endurance and self-reported physical activity and physical capacity. RESULTS: The four-month follow-up showed improvements in all outcomes for both groups, but changes did not differ significantly between the groups. Patients in the BMIP group were more adherent to exCR recommendations compared with the RC group (31% vs 19%) and a non-significant tendency towards the maintenance of submaximal aerobic exercise capacity over time was seen in the BMIP group, whereas patients in the RC group appeared to deteriorate. CONCLUSION: Both groups improved significantly at the four-month follow-up, while the 12-month follow-up showed a non-significant tendency towards better long-term effects on submaximal aerobic exercise capacity and exercise adherence for a BMIP compared with RC. In spite of this, a better understanding of the role of a BMIP in enhancing adherence is needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Borg et al. (2020) conducted an RCT in coronary artery disease (CAD) (n=170). behavioral medicine intervention in physiotherapy (BMIP) vs. routine exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (RC) was evaluated on physical fitness. A behavioral medicine intervention added to routine cardiac rehabilitation did not significantly improve physical fitness compared to routine care, but increased exercise adherence (31% vs 19%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: