Abstract
Objective To assess patient preference for exercise setting and examine if choice of setting influences the long-term health benefit of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation. Methods Patients participating in a randomised controlled trial following either heart valve surgery, or radiofrequency ablation for atrial fibrillation were given the choice to perform a 12-week exercise programme in either a supervised centre-based, or a self-management home-based setting. Exercise capacity and physical and mental health outcomes were assessed for up to 24 months after hospital discharge. Outcomes between settings were compared using a time × setting interaction using a mixed effects regression model. Results Across the 158 included patients, an equivalent proportion preferred to undertake exercise rehabilitation in a centre-based setting (55%, 95% CI: 45% to 63%) compared to a home-based setting (45%, 95% CI: 37% to 53%, p = 0.233). At baseline, those who preferred a home-based setting reported better physical health (mean difference in physical component score: 5.0, 95% CI 2.3 to 7.4; p = 0.001) and higher exercise capacity (mean between group difference 15.9 watts, 95% CI 3.7 to 28.1; p = 0.011). With the exception of the depression score in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (F(3.65), p = 0.004), there was no evidence of a significant difference in outcomes between settings. Conclusion The preference of patients to participate in home-based and centre-based exercise programmes appears to be equivalent and provides similar health benefits. Whilst these findings support that patients should be given the choice between exercise-settings when initiating cardiac rehabilitation, further confirmatory evidence is needed.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Tang, L. H., Kikkenborg Berg, S., Christensen, J., Lawaetz, J., Doherty, P., Taylor, R. S., … Zwisler, A. D. (2017). Patients’ preference for exercise setting and its influence on the health benefits gained from exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation. International Journal of Cardiology, 232, 33–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2017.01.126
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.