Key result
Traditional and fast-track cardiac rehabilitation both significantly increased exercise capacity at 6 months, but neither model led to long-term improvements in physical activity behavior.
Why the study?
Does fast-track cardiac rehabilitation improve long-term physical activity behavior compared to traditional cardiac rehabilitation in patients with coronary artery disease?
Population
44 patients with coronary artery disease
Comparison
Fast-track cardiac rehabilitation vs Traditional cardiac rehabilitation
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
6 months
Authors
Loading...
Neither CR model sustains physical activity at 6 months; leaves open need for novel behavioral strategies in CAD.
Cohort (n=44)
Does fast-track cardiac rehabilitation improve long-term physical activity behavior compared to traditional cardiac rehabilitation in patients with coronary artery disease?
Neither traditional nor fast-track cardiac rehabilitation leads to long-term physical activity behavior change at 6 months in patients with coronary artery disease, despite improvements in exercise capacity.
Ramadi et al. (2016) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease (n=44). Traditional cardiac rehabilitation vs. Fast-track cardiac rehabilitation (once a week for 8 weeks) was evaluated on Physical activity and exercise capacity (6-minute walk test distance). Traditional and fast-track cardiac rehabilitation both significantly increased exercise capacity at 6 months, but neither model led to long-term improvements in physical activity behavior.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: