Key result
Primary care physician-led rehabilitation plays a pivotal role in preventing prolonged invalidism after MI.
Emphasizes the central role of the primary care physician in coordinating early and long-term rehabilitation for patients after myocardial infarction.
May support primary care coordination to limit post-MI invalidism; leaves open whether structured programs improve outcomes in contemporary cohorts.
Invalidism is often unnecessarily prolonged after myocardial infarction because of misinformation about the natural history of the illness and because of psychosocial difficulties. To correct these problems, the rehabilitative approach should begin at the onset of illness and remain as a continuing feature in the long-term care of the patient; rehabilitation must thus be the responsibility of the patient's primary physician, who may be a general physician or a practicing cardiologist. Cardiovascular rehabilitation services should be designed to restore the patient, as rapidly as possible, to a productive, active and satisfying life. For patients with significant residual cardiac damage or particular psychological social or vocational problems, conventional medical management is often insufficient to ensure return to a full, active and productive life. The clinician should appreciate this problem early in the course of the illness and institute referral for specialized consultant assessment and management. However, all aspects of the long-term care and rehabilitation of the patient after myocardial infarction must remain under the aegis of the primary physician, ultimately using the personnel, facilities and services of the local community.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nanette K. Wenger (2008) conducted a review in Myocardial Infarction. Primary care physician-led rehabilitation was evaluated. Primary care physicians play a pivotal role in the long-term care and rehabilitation of patients after myocardial infarction to prevent unnecessarily prolonged invalidism.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: