Key result
Multi-module interactive continuous care improves 1-month LVEF by ~12% vs conventional care post-AMI.
Why the study?
Patients with AMI after PCI often face impaired cardiac recovery, poor self-management, and reduced quality of life, but the efficacy of a multi-module interactive continuous care model remained to be evaluated.
Does a multi-module interactive continuous care model improve cardiac function and patient-reported outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention?
RCT (n=182)
Randomly assigned
No
Does a multi-module interactive continuous care model improve cardiac function and patient-reported outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention?
Absolute Event Rate: 53.8% vs 42%
p-value: p=<0.01
A multi-module interactive continuous care model significantly improved short-term cardiac function, self-care capacity, and quality of life in patients recovering from acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention.
Supports implementing multi-module interactive care post-PCI AMI; extends RCT evidence for structured follow-up improving function and QoL.
Background Patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) often experience impaired cardiac functional recovery, poor self-management capacity, and reduced quality of life. The multi-module interactive continuous care model, delivered through a structured and interactive approach, may help improve rehabilitation outcomes. This study evaluated the clinical efficacy of this care model in patients with AMI after PCI to provide evidence for optimizing post-AMI rehabilitation strategies. Methods In this randomized controlled trial, 182 AMI patients were enrolled between March and July 2025 and randomly assigned to a control group or an experimental group. The control group received routine cardiology care, while the experimental group received additional multi-module interactive continuous care for 3 months. Cardiac function indicators, including heart rate (HR), estimated left ventricular filling pressure (LVFP), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and stroke volume (SV), were assessed. Self-care ability was evaluated using the Self-Care of Heart Failure Index (SCHFI), and quality of life was measured by the Health-Promoting Lifestyle Profile-II (HPLP-II) and the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ). Assessments were performed at baseline, 1 month, and 3 months after the intervention. Results At 1 month, the experimental group showed significantly lower HR and LVFP, and higher LVEF and SV compared to the control group (all P < 0.05). SCHFI and HPLP-II scores were also significantly higher, while MLHFQ scores were lower (all P < 0.05). These differences remained statistically significant at the 3-month follow-up, with intergroup differences remaining statistically significant ( P < 0.05). Conclusion The multi-module interactive continuous care model was associated with improved short-term cardiac function, self-care capacity, and quality of life in post-AMI patients after percutaneous coronary intervention. Given the single-center design and 3-month follow-up, these findings should be interpreted cautiously and confirmed in larger multicenter studies. Trial registration This trial was registered on Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( https://www.chictr.org.cn/ ; ChiCTR2500098897).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xia et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in Acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention (n=182). Multi-module interactive continuous care model vs. Conventional nursing care was evaluated on Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at 1 month (p=<0.01). The multi-module interactive continuous care model significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction at 1 month (53.8% vs 42.0%, p<0.01) compared to conventional care in post-AMI patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: