Key result
Cardiac rehabilitation attendance is linked to better risk factor control but remains low at ~29%.
Why the study?
To investigate whether patients with CHD in Europe achieve standards set by prevention and rehabilitation guidelines, assessing variability across countries, geographical risk regions, and CR attendance.
Does cardiac rehabilitation attendance improve lifestyle and risk factor control in patients with coronary heart disease?
Observational (n=8,590)
Yes
Does cardiac rehabilitation attendance improve lifestyle and risk factor control in patients with coronary heart disease?
Most European CHD patients fail to meet secondary prevention targets, and cardiac rehabilitation attendance remains low, particularly in high-risk regions, despite its association with better risk factor control.
Suboptimal guideline adherence and low CR uptake persist across Europe; leaves open the need for targeted implementation research before practice change.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This observational study investigated whether patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) in Europe are achieving the standards set by prevention and rehabilitation guidelines. Variability was studied: (i) between countries; (ii) between geographical risk regions; and (iii) attendance at cardiac rehabilitation (CR) with outcomes. METHODS: Observational study between September 2024- February 2026 in 160 hospitals across 27 countries. Geographical risk regions were defined as high, moderate or low based on WHO cardiovascular mortality data. RESULTS: Among 8590 patients with CHD (23.7% female), 17.1% were current smokers, 32.0% were obese and 33.5% reported low physical activity. 59.8% were above blood pressure target (systolic ≥ 130 and/or diastolic ≥ 80 mmHg), 82.7% were above LDL-C target (≥ 1.4 mmol/l), 32.8% had known diabetes of whom 42.2% had HbA1c ≥ 7% and 30.6% had chronic kidney disease. Prevalences of these risk factors were all highest in countries from high risk regions. 29.1% of patients attended at least one CR session, with country variability ranging from 0% to 79%, and differing by risk region (55.9% low risk, 29.7% moderate risk and 10.2% high risk; p < 0.001). Attendance at CR programme was associated with significantly better lifestyles, risk factor control and use of cardioprotective drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Most European patients are not achieving targets set by prevention guidelines. There is marked variability in CR attendance, evidence of inverse care with lowest attendance in highest risk regions, despite better outcomes for CR. These results inform the challenges for implementation of the first ESC guideline on CR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wood et al. (2026) conducted an observational in coronary heart disease (CHD) (n=8,590). Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) attendance vs. No cardiac rehabilitation attendance was evaluated on Achievement of prevention and rehabilitation guideline standards. Among 8,590 European patients with coronary heart disease, only 29.1% attended cardiac rehabilitation, though attendance was associated with significantly better risk factor control.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: