What does this research mean for the field?

Home-based cardiac rehabilitation improves aerobic fitness and quality of life more effectively than usual cardiac rehabilitation and yields benefits comparable to center-based rehabilitation without increasing adverse events. Novelty: ClaimNovelty.SYNTHESIS. Consensus alignment: ConsensusAlignment.NEUTRAL.

January 1, 2026International Journal of Cardiovascular SciencesOpen Access

Home-Based Vs. Usual and Center-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation: Effects on Aerobic Fitness and Quality of Life

Q: What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Systematic Review. Population: Coronary artery disease or heart failure (n=2298). Intervention: Home-based cardiac rehabilitation vs. Usual cardiac rehabilitation and center-based cardiac rehabilitation. Primary outcome: Aerobic fitness and quality of life.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

Home-based cardiac rehabilitation improves fitness and quality of life over usual care and matches center-based programs.

n=2,298

Why the study?

Home-based cardiac rehabilitation has been proposed to expand treatment access for patients with cardiovascular diseases, but its effects compared with usual and center-based cardiac rehabilitation needed evaluation.

Does home-based cardiac rehabilitation improve aerobic fitness and quality of life in adults and older adults with coronary artery disease or heart failure compared to usual or center-based rehabilitation?

Study Design

Type

Systematic Review (n=2,298)

Structured PICO

Population

2,298 adults and older adults with coronary artery disease or heart failure across 23 randomized controlled trials comparing home-based cardiac rehabilitation to usual or center-based care.

Intervention

Home-based cardiac rehabilitation (HOME-CR) focused on physical exercise (aerobic training, alone or combined with resistance training), duration 8 to 48 weeks, 2 to 6 sessions per week, mostly with remote contact every 1-2 weeks.

Comparator

Usual cardiac rehabilitation (USUAL-CR, traditional care recommendations without structured exercise) and center-based cardiac rehabilitation (CENTER-CR, structured exercise in clinical centers).

Outcome

Aerobic fitness (measured by cardiopulmonary exercise test, maximal tests, or 6-minute walk test) and quality of life (measured by various questionnaires).patient reported

Home-based cardiac rehabilitation is an effective and safe alternative to center-based rehabilitation, offering superior improvements in aerobic fitness and quality of life compared to usual care.

Limitations

Narrative systematic review without quantitative pooled estimates (meta-analysis)
Literature search was conducted in a single database (PubMed)
Inclusion was restricted to studies with a maximum duration of one year
Studies involving other cardiovascular conditions were excluded
Review was limited to aerobic fitness and quality of life outcomes
Narrative systematic review without quantitative pooled estimates
Search conducted in a single database
Inclusion restricted to studies with a maximum duration of one year
Excluded other cardiovascular conditions
Limited to aerobic fitness and quality of life

Implication

Home-based cardiac rehabilitation yields comparable aerobic fitness, quality of life, and safety outcomes; reinforces its role as an accessible alternative to center-based programs.

Abstract

Home-based cardiac rehabilitation has been proposed as an alternative to expand access to treatment for patients with cardiovascular diseases. This systematic review evaluated the effects of home-based cardiac rehabilitation, with emphasis on physical exercise, on aerobic fitness, quality of life, and adverse events compared with usual cardiac rehabilitation and center-based cardiac rehabilitation. A literature search was conducted in the PubMed database, including only randomized controlled clinical trials involving adults and older adults with coronary artery disease or heart failure. [...]

Discussion

No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.

Cite This Study

Mota et al. (2026) conducted a systematic review in Coronary artery disease or heart failure (n=2,298). Home-based cardiac rehabilitation vs. Usual cardiac rehabilitation and center-based cardiac rehabilitation was evaluated on Aerobic fitness and quality of life. Home-based cardiac rehabilitation improves aerobic fitness and quality of life more effectively than usual cardiac rehabilitation and provides benefits comparable to center-based rehabilitation without increasing adverse events.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a915e56a746da0776b39c29 https://doi.org/10.36660/ijcs.20250274

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Implication

Home-based cardiac rehabilitation yields comparable aerobic fitness, quality of life, and safety outcomes; reinforces its role as an accessible alternative to center-based programs.

Home-Based Vs. Usual and Center-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation: Effects on Aerobic Fitness and Quality of Life

Study Design

Structured PICO

Limitations

Implication

Abstract

Discussion

Cite This Study

Home-Based Vs. Usual and Center-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation: Effects on Aerobic Fitness and Quality of Life

Study Design

Structured PICO

Limitations

Implication

Abstract

Discussion

Cite This Study

Keep reading

Keep reading