Key result
A survey of 190 UK cardiac rehabilitation coordinators found attendance rates of 83.5% for phase 1 and 66.3% for phase 3, with most programs using three or more methods of patient contact.
Cross-Sectional (n=190)
Yes
There is significant variation in how UK cardiac rehabilitation programmes identify and invite patients, highlighting a need for knowledge exchange to optimize services.
Inconsistent invitation practices may limit uptake; leaves open whether standardized methods improve phase 3 attendance.
Aim: In the UK, cardiac rehabilitation programmes differ in set-up and service provision is variable. No aggregate information is available on how programmes identify and invite patients. This study aimed to determine how patients are identified and invited to attend cardiac rehabilitation programmes. Methods: A nine-item electronic survey was e-mailed to 354 publicly-listed UK cardiac rehabilitation coordinators. The survey included questions on the phases of cardiac rehabilitation on offer, how patients are identified, how they are invited, how non-attenders are followed up and which groups are least likely to attend. Results: In total, 190 cardiac rehabilitation coordinators participated in the survey (53% response rate). The attendance rate was 83.5% for phase 1 and 66.3% for phase 3. Suitable patients were identified through referrals from hospital (82.6%), by the cardiologist/hospital physician (53.6%) and from going around wards (59%). In hospital invitation (70.5%), telephone (70%) and written invitations/reminders (50.5%) were the most frequently used modes of inviting patients. Most programmes used three (n=110) or more (n=127) methods of patient contact. People at work and older women were less likely to attend cardiac rehabilitation. Conclusions: Variations in patient identification and invitation methods indicate that liaison and knowledge exchange could help optimise services. The importance of context-sensitive policies is highlighted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dressler et al. (2013) conducted a cross-sectional in Cardiac rehabilitation (n=190). Survey of patient identification and invitation methods was evaluated on Methods of patient identification and invitation, and attendance rates. A survey of 190 UK cardiac rehabilitation coordinators found attendance rates of 83.5% for phase 1 and 66.3% for phase 3, with most programs using three or more methods of patient contact.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: