Key result
Cardiac rehabilitation after stroke and TIA proves safe and feasible despite limited data on effectiveness.
Why the study?
To summarise evidence on the intervention design, safety, feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation-based interventions for people after stroke or transient ischaemic attack.
Is a cardiac rehabilitation-based intervention safe, feasible, acceptable, and effective for people who have had a stroke or TIA?
Systematic Review (n=1,951)
Is a cardiac rehabilitation-based intervention safe, feasible, acceptable, and effective for people who have had a stroke or TIA?
Cardiac rehabilitation-based interventions appear safe, feasible, and acceptable for patients with mild stroke or TIA, but evidence on long-term effectiveness and suitability for those with moderate-to-severe disability remains limited.
May support adapted cardiac rehabilitation for mild stroke/TIA patients; leaves open long-term effectiveness and suitability for moderate-to-severe disability.
ObjectiveTo summarise evidence on the intervention design, safety, feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of a cardiac rehabilitation-based intervention for people who have had a stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA).Data sourcesMedline, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL were searched between inception and 2026 for experimental or observational English-language studies that evaluated a cardiac rehabilitation-based intervention delivered to people with a history of stroke or TIA.Review methodsData were synthesised descriptively.ResultsNineteen studies were included (1951 participants), nine included people who had had a TIA, one exclusively. Most studies specified that participants had to have minimal or no stroke-associated disability. Reported time since stroke or TIA ranged from four weeks to more than one year. The interventions varied considerably in dose and components, though all included aerobic exercise training. Adverse event reporting was inconsistent; no study concluded that their interventions were unsafe, and one study stopped exercise testing. All 14 studies that measured feasibility reported that their study or intervention was feasible, though one concluded that it may not be feasible to enrol people with moderate stroke severity into existing cardiac rehabilitation programmes. Eight studies examined acceptability, all concluding that the interventions were acceptable and positively received. One powered randomised controlled trial found improvements were not sustained at 1-year follow-up.ConclusionsThe evidence suggests that cardiac rehabilitation after stroke and TIA is safe, feasible and acceptable. There are limited data relating to the inclusion of people with moderate or severe disability after stroke, or from trials regarding effectiveness.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hartley et al. (2026) conducted a systematic review in Stroke or transient ischaemic attack (TIA) (n=1,951). Cardiac rehabilitation-based intervention was evaluated on Safety, feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness. Cardiac rehabilitation after stroke and TIA was safe, feasible, and acceptable across 19 studies (1,951 participants), though data on effectiveness and moderate-to-severe disability are limited.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: