Key result
Clinicians' exercise prescriptions for cardiovascular disease patients showed large inter-clinician variance and differed significantly from the EXPERT tool recommendations (p<0.001).
Why the study?
Does exercise prescription by clinicians vary significantly and differ from the EXPERT tool recommendations for patients with cardiovascular disease?
Observational (n=53)
Yes
Does exercise prescription by clinicians vary significantly and differ from the EXPERT tool recommendations for patients with cardiovascular disease?
Significant inter-clinician variance exists in exercise prescription for cardiovascular disease patients, differing from digital decision support recommendations and highlighting the need for standardization in cardiac rehabilitation.
Large variance in clinician prescriptions may affect rehab consistency; leaves open whether EXPERT alignment improves outcomes.
Background Although disease-specific exercise guidelines for cardiovascular disease (CVD) are widely available, it remains uncertain whether these different exercise guidelines are integrated properly for patients with different CVDs. The aim of this study was to assess the inter-clinician variance in exercise prescription for patients with various CVDs and to compare these prescriptions with recommendations from the EXercise Prescription in Everyday practice and Rehabilitative Training (EXPERT) tool, a digital decision support system for integrated state-of-the-art exercise prescription in CVD. Design The study was a prospective observational survey. Methods Fifty-three CV rehabilitation clinicians from nine European countries were asked to prescribe exercise intensity (based on percentage of peak heart rate (HR peak )), frequency, session duration, programme duration and exercise type (endurance or strength training) for the same five patients. Exercise prescriptions were compared between clinicians, and relationships with clinician characteristics were studied. In addition, these exercise prescriptions were compared with recommendations from the EXPERT tool. Results A large inter-clinician variance was found for prescribed exercise intensity (median (interquartile range (IQR)): 83 (13) % of HR peak ), frequency (median (IQR): 4 (2) days/week), session duration (median (IQR): 45 (18) min/session), programme duration (median (IQR): 12 (18) weeks), total exercise volume (median (IQR): 1215 (1961) peak-effort training hours) and prescription of strength training exercises (prescribed in 78% of all cases). Moreover, clinicians’ exercise prescriptions were significantly different from those of the EXPERT tool ( p < 0.001). Conclusions This study reveals significant inter-clinician variance in exercise prescription for patients with different CVDs and disagreement with an integrated state-of-the-art system for exercise prescription, justifying the need for standardization efforts regarding integrated exercise prescription in CV rehabilitation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hansen et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Cardiovascular disease (n=53). Clinicians' exercise prescriptions vs. EXPERT tool recommendations was evaluated on Difference between clinicians' exercise prescriptions and EXPERT tool recommendations (p=<0.001). Clinicians' exercise prescriptions for cardiovascular disease patients showed large inter-clinician variance and differed significantly from the EXPERT tool recommendations (p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: