Key result
Exercise rehabilitation improves 6-minute walk distance by ~33 meters over routine care in acute HF.
Why the study?
The effectiveness of exercise rehabilitation in patients with acute heart failure remains controversial.
Does exercise rehabilitation improve 6-minute walk distance in patients with acute heart failure?
Meta-Analysis (n=1,215)
Does exercise rehabilitation improve 6-minute walk distance in patients with acute heart failure?
Mean Difference: 33.04 (95% CI 31.37–34.7)
p-value: p=<.001
Exercise rehabilitation improves functional ability, quality of life, and reduces readmission in patients with acute heart failure compared to routine care.
Supports incorporating exercise rehab in AHF to boost function and reduce readmissions; extends RCT evidence to acute-phase care.
BACKGROUND: Exercise rehabilitation is conducive to increasing functional ability and improving health outcomes, but its effectiveness in patients with acute heart failure (AHF) is still controversial. PURPOSE: In this study, our aim was to systematically examine the efficacy of exercise rehabilitation in people with AHF. METHODS: A search was conducted for randomized controlled trial studies on exercise rehabilitation in patients with AHF up to November 2021. Two investigators conducted literature selection, quality assessments, and data extractions independently. The primary outcome was 6-minute walk distance, and the secondary outcomes were left ventricular ejection fraction, quality of life, Short Physical Performance Battery, readmission, and mortality. RevMan (version 5.3) software was used for the meta-analysis. RESULTS: Twelve studies with 1215 participants were included. Exercise rehabilitation significantly improved the 6-minute walk distance (mean difference [MD], 33.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 31.37-34.70; P < .001; I2 = 0%), quality of life (MD, -11.57; 95% CI, -19.25 to -3.89; P = .003; I2 = 98%), Short Physical Performance Battery (MD, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.36-1.44; P < .001; I2 = 0%), and rate of readmission for any cause (risk ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.26-0.88; P = .02; I2 = 7%), compared with routine care. However, no statistically significant effects on left ventricular ejection fraction (MD, 0.94; 95% CI, -1.62 to 3.51; P = .47; I2 = 0%) and mortality (risk ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.64-1.80; P = .79; I2 = 0%) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with routine care, exercise rehabilitation improved functional ability and quality of life, reducing readmission in patients with AHF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liang et al. (2023) conducted a meta-analysis in Acute heart failure (n=1,215). Exercise rehabilitation vs. Routine care was evaluated on 6-minute walk distance (MD 33.04, 95% CI 31.37-34.70, p=<.001). Exercise rehabilitation significantly improved 6-minute walk distance compared with routine care in patients with acute heart failure (MD 33.04; 95% CI 31.37-34.70; P<.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: