Key result
Cardiac rehabilitation is linked to ~74% lower all-cause mortality, maximized with education plus therapy.
Why the study?
The prognostic impact of different cardiac rehabilitation education and therapy patterns after acute myocardial infarction in Asian real-world practice was uncertain.
Does cardiac rehabilitation education and therapy improve clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction?
Cohort (n=92,968)
Yes
Does cardiac rehabilitation education and therapy improve clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction?
Hazard Ratio: 0.257 (95% CI 0.123–0.539)
Absolute Event Rate: 2.3% vs 11.6%
Cardiac rehabilitation, particularly when including structured education, is associated with substantial reductions in mortality and cardiovascular events after acute myocardial infarction in real-world practice.
CR with education may lower post-AMI mortality in Korean real-world practice; leaves open optimal patterns pending randomized trials.
Purpose: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is central to tertiary prevention after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), but the prognostic impact of different education and therapy patterns in Asian real world practice is uncertain. Materials and Methods:Using Korean National Health Insurance Service claims (2018-2022), we identified patients aged ≥40 years hospitalized for AMI who underwent thrombolysis, percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery bypass grafting.CR exposure was classified into six groups by structured education and the number of supervised therapy sessions, and outcomes over 2 years included all cause readmission, readmission and emergency room (ER) visits for MI or unstable angina (UA), all cause mortality, repeat revascularization, and stroke.Multivariable Cox models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Results: Among 92968 patients, 85.5% received no CR, 3.2% had education only, and 11.3% received any therapy.Education only participants had the lowest crude rates of mortality, cardiovascular readmission, and repeat revascularization.All CR exposed groups showed lower all cause mortality, with the greatest benefit in education plus ≥4 therapy sessions (HR 0.257, 95% CI 0.123-0.539)and ≥4 therapy sessions without education (HR 0.291, 95% CI 0.203-0.417).Education focused CR was additionally associated with lower cardiovascular readmission and repeat revascularization, whereas readmission and ER visits varied across therapy intensive groups.Conclusion: In this nationwide Korean AMI cohort, CR participation, especially with education, was associated with substantial mortality reduction, suggesting structured education as a pragmatic cornerstone of tertiary prevention, with supervised therapy providing incremental benefit when available.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2026 study conducted a cohort in Acute Myocardial Infarction (n=92,968). Cardiac rehabilitation (education and/or supervised therapy) vs. No cardiac rehabilitation was evaluated on All-cause mortality (HR 0.257, 95% CI 0.123-0.539). Cardiac rehabilitation participation, especially education combined with 4 or more therapy sessions, was associated with a substantial reduction in all-cause mortality (HR 0.257) compared to no participation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: