Key result
CHOICE replication protocol outlines a planned RCT evaluating modular secondary prevention for ACS survivors.
Why the study?
Although morbidity and mortality from coronary heart disease are high, only a minority of ACS survivors access effective secondary prevention programs, and replication of the CHOICE program at multiple sites with ongoing reinforcement has not been established.
Does the CHOICE-plus program improve risk factor modification in acute coronary syndrome survivors not accessing standard cardiac rehabilitation compared to a 3-month program or conventional care?
RCT (n=400)
Single-blind
Computer-generated random allocation sequence
Yes
Does the CHOICE-plus program improve risk factor modification in acute coronary syndrome survivors not accessing standard cardiac rehabilitation compared to a 3-month program or conventional care?
This study protocol describes a multi-center randomized trial to evaluate whether an extended 30-month secondary prevention program improves risk factor modification in ACS survivors compared to a 3-month program or conventional care.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brief CHOICE intervention suffices for sustained risk factor gains in ACS survivors; challenges value of prolonged reinforcement and extends scalable secondary prevention options.
Neubeck et al. (2008) conducted an RCT in Acute coronary syndrome (n=400). CHOICE and CHOICE-plus modular secondary prevention programs vs. Conventional care or 3-month CHOICE program was evaluated on Total cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, smoking rates, and physical activity levels at 12 and 36 months. The CHOICE replication trial protocol outlines a planned multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate a modular secondary prevention program for acute coronary syndrome survivors, reporting no clinical results.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: