Key result
Participation in a 6-week cardiac rehabilitation program did not significantly improve health-related quality of life over 6 months compared to non-participation in patients with coronary artery disease.
Why the study?
Does a six-week Phase II outpatient cardiac rehabilitation program improve health-related quality of life over 6 months in patients undergoing coronary angiography for angina with documented CAD?
Observational (n=221)
No
Does a six-week Phase II outpatient cardiac rehabilitation program improve health-related quality of life over 6 months in patients undergoing coronary angiography for angina with documented CAD?
Does not support routine 6-week cardiac rehabilitation for HRQoL gains in CAD; leaves open effects of longer or targeted programs.
BACKGROUND: Improvements in patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) are important goals of cardiac rehabilitation (CR). In patients undergoing coronary angiography for angina and with documented coronary artery disease (CAD), the present study compared HRQoL over 6 months in CR participants and non-participants. Clinical predictors of CR participants were also assessed. METHODS: A total of 221 consecutive patients undergoing angiography for angina with documented CAD and who were eligible for a CR program were recruited. CR participants were enrolled in a six-week Phase II outpatient CR course (31%, n = 68) within 2 months following angiography and the non-participants were included as a control. At baseline (angiography), one and six months post angiography, clinical and HRQoL data were obtained including the Short Form-36 (SF-36) and the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ). The response rate for the HRQoL assessment was 68% (n = 150). Cross sectional comparisons were age-adjusted and performed using logistic or linear regression as appropriate. Longitudinal changes in HRQoL were assessed using least squares regression. Finally, a multiple logistic regression was fitted with CR participant as the final outcome. RESULTS: At angiography, the CR non-participants were older, and age-adjusted analyses revealed poorer physical (angina limitation: 54 ± 25 versus 64 ± 22, p <0.05) and mental HRQoL (significant psycho-social distress: 62%, n = 95 versus 47%, n = 32, p <0.05) compared to the CR participants. In addition, the CR participants were more likely to have undergone angiography for myocardial infarction (OR = 2.8, 95% CI 1.5-5.3, p = 0.001). By six months, all patients showed an improvement in HRQoL indices, however the rate of improvement did not differ between the controls and CR participants. CONCLUSION: Following angiography, CAD patients reported improvements in both generic and disease-specific HRQoL, however CR participation did not influence this outcome. This may be explained by biases in CR enrollment, whereby acute patients, who may be less limited in HRQoL compared to stable, chronic patients, are targeted for CR participation. Further investigation is required so CR programs maximize the quality of life benefits to all potential CR patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tavella et al. (2012) conducted an observational in Coronary artery disease (n=221). Phase II Cardiac Rehabilitation vs. Non-participants (No cardiac rehabilitation) was evaluated on Longitudinal changes in health-related quality of life (SF-36 and SAQ scores) over 6 months. Participation in a 6-week cardiac rehabilitation program did not significantly improve health-related quality of life over 6 months compared to non-participation in patients with coronary artery disease.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: