Home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared with centre-based rehabilitation and usual care: A systematic review and meta-analysis

被引:126
作者
Jolly, Kate
Taylor, Rod S.
Lip, Gregory Y. H.
Stevens, Andrew
机构
[1] Univ Dept Med, City Hosp, Birmingham B18 7QH, W Midlands, England
[2] Univ Birmingham, Dept Epidemiol & Publ Hlth, Birmingham B15 2TT, W Midlands, England
关键词
systematic review; cardiac rehabilitation; coronary disease; home care services;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijcard.2005.11.002
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: To determine the effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation programmes compared with (i) usual care and (ii) supervised centre-based cardiac rehabilitation on mortality, health related quality of life and modifiable cardiac risk factors of patients with coronary heart disease. Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Main outcome measures: mortality, smoking cessation, exercise capacity, systolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, psychological status, and health related quality of life. Results: Eighteen included trials for home versus usual rehabilitation and six trials of home versus supervised centre-based rehabilitation were identified. The home-based interventions were clinically heterogeneous, trials often small, with quality poorly reported. Compared with usual care, home-based cardiac rehabilitation had a 4 mm Hg (95% Cl 6.5, 1.5) greater reduction in systolic blood pressure, and a reduced relative risk of being a smoker at follow-up (RR 0.71, 95% Cl 0.51, 1.00). Differences in exercise capacity, total cholesterol, anxiety and depression were all in favour of the home-based group. In patients post-myocardial infarction exercise capacity was significantly improved in the home rehabilitation group by 1.1 METS (95% Cl 0.2, 2.1) compared to usual care. The comparison of home-based with supervised centre-based cardiac rehabilitation revealed no significant differences in exercise capacity, systolic blood pressure and total cholesterol. Conclusions: Current evidence does not show home-based cardiac rehabilitation to be significantly inferior to centre-based rehabilitation for low-risk cardiac patients. However, the numbers of patients included are less than 750 and ongoing trials will contribute to the debate on the acceptability, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:343 / 351
页数:9
相关论文
共 37 条
[1]   A controlled trial of cardiac rehabilitation in the home setting using electrocardiographic and voice transtelephonic monitoring [J].
Ades, PA ;
Pashkow, FJ ;
Fletcher, G ;
Pina, IL ;
Zohman, LR ;
Nestor, JR .
AMERICAN HEART JOURNAL, 2000, 139 (03) :543-548
[2]   Coronary risk factor modification in women after coronary artery bypass surgery [J].
Allen, JK .
NURSING RESEARCH, 1996, 45 (05) :260-265
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2001, SYSTEMATIC REV HLTH, DOI DOI 10.1002/9780470693926
[4]  
Aros F, 1993, Rev Esp Cardiol, V46, P544
[5]   A controlled trial of hospital versus home-based exercise in cardiac patients [J].
Arthur, HM ;
Smith, KM ;
Kodis, J ;
McKelvie, R .
MEDICINE AND SCIENCE IN SPORTS AND EXERCISE, 2002, 34 (10) :1544-1550
[6]  
BECKIE T, 1989, HEART LUNG, V18, P46
[7]  
BELL J, 1998, COMPARISON MULTIDISC
[8]  
BROSSEAU R, 1995, CAN J CARDIOL, V11, P675
[9]  
BROWN CA, 1994, J CARDIOPULM REHABIL, V14, P238
[10]  
Brubaker Peter H, 2005, J Cardiopulm Rehabil, V25, P30, DOI 10.1097/00008483-200501000-00007