South Asian patients perceived cardiac rehabilitation as lacking cultural sensitivity and viewed it as additional support rather than a fundamental part of care.
What are the experiences and perceptions of cardiac rehabilitation among South Asian patients?
Cardiac rehabilitation programs lack cultural sensitivity for South Asian patients, who often view it as optional support rather than fundamental care, highlighting the need for personalized, culturally tailored delivery.
Background/Aims Individuals from South Asian backgrounds are at greater risk of developing coronary heart disease. Cardiac rehabilitation reduces the risk of future cardiac events, yet uptake is low among South Asian populations. This study explored South Asian patients' understanding and experiences of cardiac rehabilitation. Methods This qualitative, semi-structured study identified a purposeful sample of 36 eligible patients, of whom six participated in an interview that explored their experiences and perceptions of cardiac rehabilitation. Data were analysed using inductive analysis. Results Three themes were identified: starting the conversation; expectation vs reality; and meeting patient needs. Patients perceived cardiac rehabilitation as additional support rather than a fundamental part of care. Moreover, they considered the content of cardiac rehabilitation programmes to lack cultural sensitivity, which influenced both attendance and perceived relevance. Conclusions: Nurses must promote cardiac rehabilitation during the acute phase of recovery, while considering South Asian patients' beliefs, perceptions and cultural acceptance of cardiac rehabilitation. Invitations to attend and cardiac rehabilitation delivery must be personalised, accounting for cultural influences on lifestyle.
Lotto et al. (Sun,) conducted a other in Coronary heart disease (n=6). Cardiac rehabilitation was evaluated on Understanding and experiences of cardiac rehabilitation. South Asian patients perceived cardiac rehabilitation as lacking cultural sensitivity and viewed it as additional support rather than a fundamental part of care.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: