Why the study?
Despite the clinical benefits of cardiac rehabilitation for secondary prevention, significant sex disparities exist across outpatient phase II cardiac rehabilitation programming.
This review highlights significant sex disparities in cardiac rehabilitation referral, enrollment, and completion, and discusses strategies like automatic referral and female-only programming to mitigate these gaps.
May prompt targeted referral strategies in practice; leaves open efficacy of mitigation approaches in prospective trials.
Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in males and females in the United States and globally. Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is recommended by the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology for secondary prevention for patients with cardiovascular disease. CR participation is associated with improved cardiovascular disease risk factor management, quality of life, and exercise capacity as well as reductions in hospital admissions and mortality. Despite these advantageous clinical outcomes, significant sex disparities exist in outpatient phase II CR programming. This article reviews sex differences that are present in the spectrum of care provided by outpatient phase II CR programming (ie, from referral to clinical management). We first review CR participation by detailing the sex disparities in the rates of CR referral, enrollment, and completion. In doing so, we discuss patient, health care provider, and social/environmental level barriers to CR participation with a particular emphasis on those barriers that majorly impact females. We also evaluate sex differences in the core components incorporated into CR programming (eg, patient assessment, exercise training, hypertension management). Next, we review strategies to mitigate these sex differences in CR participation with a focus on automatic CR referral, female-only CR programming, and hybrid CR. Finally, we outline knowledge gaps and areas of future research to minimize and prevent sex differences in CR programming.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2022 study studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: