April 19, 2016The Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing
Cardiac Rehabilitation
Key result
Despite strong evidence that exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation reduces overall mortality (RR 0.87), systematic flaws and barriers severely limit its referral and implementation in Australia.
Population
Patients eligible for secondary prevention of acute coronary syndromes
Design
Review
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Persistent barriers limit cardiac rehabilitation access in Australia; leaves open whether standardization or technology improves uptake.
Structured PICO
P
Population
Patients up to 12 months following an acute coronary syndrome event in Australia.
I
Intervention
Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs
Main Result
Relative Risk: 0.87 (95% CI 0.75–0.99)
This review identifies systemic barriers to cardiac rehabilitation implementation in Australia and proposes solutions including standardization, technology use, and interorganizational collaboration to improve secondary prevention.
Limitations
- Fragmented and non-standardized data capture processes limit evaluation of service effectiveness.
- Funding models and systems may limit the uptake of alternate models of cardiac rehabilitation delivery.
- Heterogeneity of program delivery may compromise the effectiveness of programs in routine clinical practice.
- Lack of a consistent message from multiple lead organizations may lead to clinician and patient confusion.
Cite This Study
Astley et al. (2016) conducted a review in Acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation vs. Usual care was evaluated on Overall mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.75-0.99). Despite strong evidence that exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation reduces overall mortality (RR 0.87), systematic flaws and barriers severely limit its referral and implementation in Australia.