PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 27, 2016Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention13 citations

Association Between Phase 3 Cardiac Rehabilitation and Clinical Events

View Full Paper
CBClinton A. BrawnerDGDaniel A. GirdanoJEJonathan K. Ehrman

Structured PICO

Does phase 3 cardiac rehabilitation participation reduce the composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or heart failure hospitalization in patients with ischemic heart disease who completed phase 2 CR?

P
Population
2,039 patients with ischemic heart disease who completed 12 visits of phase 2 cardiac rehabilitation, mean age 59 ± 10 years, 32% women.
I
Intervention
Phase 3 cardiac rehabilitation (maintenance exercise program) participation (regular or irregular) during the 8 weeks after phase 2 CR.
C
Comparator
No participation in phase 3 cardiac rehabilitation.
O
Outcome
Composite outcome of all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or heart failure hospitalization at median 5.6 years follow-up.composite

Participation in phase 3 cardiac rehabilitation after completing phase 2 CR was not associated with a reduced risk of clinical events in patients with ischemic heart disease.

Abstract

PURPOSE: There is an inverse relationship between phase 2 cardiac rehabilitation (CR) visits and all-cause mortality. Phase 3 CR is a maintenance exercise program for which clinical outcomes are uncertain. This retrospective study describes the association between phase 3 CR participation and clinical events among patients with ischemic heart disease after completion of phase 2 CR. METHODS: Patients who completed 12 visits of phase 2 CR as provided by their health insurance were categorized on the basis of their frequency of participation (ie, none, irregular, and regular) in phase 3 CR during the 8 weeks after phase 2 CR. Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate the association between phase 3 CR participation and risk for a composite outcome that included all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or heart failure hospitalization. RESULTS: Among 2039 patients (32% women; age = 59 ± 10 years) who completed phase 2 CR, 101 were regular and 129 were irregular participants of phase 3 CR. Over a median followup of 5.6 years, 556 (27%) patients experienced the outcome. Neither irregular nor regular participation in phase 3 CR was significantly associated with risk for the outcome in unadjusted (P = .671 and P = .396, respectively) or adjusted (P = .737 and P = .890, respectively) analyses. CONCLUSIONS: We did not observe an incremental clinical benefit from weekly participation in Phase 3 CR after completion of phase 2 CR among patients with ischemic heart disease. Additional research addressing the dose-response relationship between phase 2 and 3 CR and clinical outcomes is needed.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Brawner et al. (2016) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a82225ce9dda39dfc46bf45https://doi.org/10.1097/hcr.0000000000000201
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The Extensive Lifestyle Management Intervention (ELMI) following cardiac rehabilitation trial2003 · 98 citations
  2. 2Cardiac Rehabilitation and Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease2005 · 1,074 citations
  3. 3Core Components of Cardiac Rehabilitation/Secondary Prevention Programs2000 · 500 citations
  4. 4Cardiac Rehabilitation Attendance and Outcomes in Coronary Artery Disease Patients2012 · 303 citations
  5. 5Cardiac Rehabilitation and Survival in Older Coronary Patients2009 · 556 citations