Key result
Cardiac rehabilitation using the learning and coping pedagogical strategy showed no difference in health-related quality of life, anxiety, depression, or self-management compared to the EMMA strategy.
Why the study?
It was unclear whether cardiac rehabilitation based on the learning and coping pedagogical strategy improves long-term patient-reported outcomes compared with the EMMA strategy.
Does cardiac rehabilitation based on the learning and coping (LC) strategy improve health-related quality of life, anxiety, depression, and self-management compared to the EMMA strategy in patients with ischaemic heart disease?
RCT (n=555)
Yes
Does cardiac rehabilitation based on the learning and coping (LC) strategy improve health-related quality of life, anxiety, depression, and self-management compared to the EMMA strategy in patients with ischaemic heart disease?
Evidence-based patient education strategies in cardiac rehabilitation lead to sustained improvements in patient-reported outcomes, with no single pedagogical strategy proving superior.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No superiority between strategies in cardiac rehab; leaves open optimal pedagogical approaches for ischaemic heart disease.
This study examined whether patients attending cardiac rehabilitation (CR) based on the pedagogical strategy learning and coping (LC) led to improved health-related quality of life (HRQL), reduced symptoms of anxiety and depression and improved self-management 6 and 12 months after the completion of CR compared with patients attending CR based on the pedagogical strategy 'Empowerment, Motivation and Medical Adherence' (EMMA). A pragmatic cluster-controlled trial of two pedagogical strategies, LC and EMMA, including 10 primary health care settings and 555 patients diagnosed with ischaemic heart disease and referred to CR between August 2018 and July 2019 was conducted. In total, 312 patients replied to the questionnaires collected at baseline, 12 weeks, 6 months and 12 months after completing CR. Linear regression analyses adjusted for potential confounder variables and cluster effects were performed. We found clinically relevant and statistically significant improvements in HRQL, anxiety, depression and self-management after completing CR. The improvements were sustained at 6 and 12 months after the completion of CR. We found no differences between the two evidence-based patient education strategies. In conclusion, this study supports the use of evidence-based patient education strategies, but there is no evidence to suggest that one pedagogical strategy is superior to the other.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pedersen et al. (2023) conducted an RCT in Ischaemic heart disease (n=555). Pedagogical strategy learning and coping (LC) vs. Pedagogical strategy 'Empowerment, Motivation and Medical Adherence' (EMMA) was evaluated on Health-related quality of life (HRQL), symptoms of anxiety and depression, and self-management. Cardiac rehabilitation using the learning and coping pedagogical strategy showed no difference in health-related quality of life, anxiety, depression, or self-management compared to the EMMA strategy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: