Clark Alexander M, Hartling Lisa, Vandermeer Ben, McAlister Finlay A
University of Alberta Evidence-based Practice Center, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Ann Intern Med. 2005 Nov 1;143(9):659-72. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-143-9-200511010-00010.
Although supervised exercise programs reduce mortality in survivors of myocardial infarction, the effects of other types of cardiac secondary prevention programs are unknown.
To determine the effectiveness of secondary cardiac prevention programs with and without exercise components.
The authors searched MEDLINE (1966-2004), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, CINAHL, SIGLE, and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Study Registry. They also contacted primary study authors and hand-searched bibliographies provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
Randomized clinical trials.
Two reviewers chose studies and extracted data independently; random-effects summary risk ratios were calculated.
The authors identified 63 randomized trials (21 295 patients with coronary disease). The summary risk ratio was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.77 to 0.94) for all-cause mortality, but this result differed over time with a risk ratio of 0.97 (CI, 0.82 to 1.14) at 12 months and 0.53 (CI, 0.35 to 0.81) at 24 months. The summary risk ratio was 0.83 (CI, 0.74 to 0.94) for recurrent myocardial infarction over a median follow-up of 12 months. Effects were similar for programs that included risk factor education or counseling with a structured exercise component (risk ratio, 0.88 [CI, 0.74 to 1.04] for mortality and 0.62 [CI, 0.44 to 0.87] for myocardial infarction), for programs that included risk factor education or counseling without an exercise component (risk ratio, 0.87 [CI, 0.76 to 0.99] for mortality and 0.86 [CI, 0.72 to 1.03] for myocardial infarction), and for programs that were solely exercise-based (risk ratio, 0.72 [CI, 0.54 to 0.95] for mortality and 0.76 [CI, 0.57 to 1.01] for myocardial infarction). Most of these programs improved quality of life or functional status, but effect sizes were small.
Although these programs may reduce total health care costs, published data on the costs of the programs are inadequate to conclusively comment on their cost-effectiveness.
A wide variety of secondary prevention programs improve health outcomes in patients with coronary disease.
尽管有监督的运动计划可降低心肌梗死幸存者的死亡率,但其他类型的心脏二级预防计划的效果尚不清楚。
确定有运动成分和无运动成分的心脏二级预防计划的有效性。
作者检索了MEDLINE(1966 - 2004年)、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库、EMBASE、CINAHL、SIGLE以及Cochrane有效实践与护理组织研究注册库。他们还联系了原始研究的作者,并手工检索了医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心提供的参考文献。
随机临床试验。
两名评审员独立选择研究并提取数据;计算随机效应汇总风险比。
作者识别出63项随机试验(21295例冠心病患者)。全因死亡率的汇总风险比为0.85(95%CI,0.77至0.94),但该结果随时间有所不同,12个月时风险比为0.97(CI,0.82至1.14),24个月时为0.53(CI,0.35至0.81)。在中位随访12个月期间,复发性心肌梗死的汇总风险比为0.83(CI,0.74至0.94)。对于包含危险因素教育或咨询以及结构化运动成分的计划(死亡率风险比为0.88 [CI,0.74至1.04],心肌梗死风险比为0.62 [CI,0.44至0.87])、包含危险因素教育或咨询但无运动成分的计划(死亡率风险比为0.87 [CI,0.76至0.99],心肌梗死风险比为0.86 [CI,0.72至1.03])以及仅基于运动的计划(死亡率风险比为0.72 [CI,0.54至0.95],心肌梗死风险比为0.76 [CI,0.57至1.01]),效果相似。这些计划大多改善了生活质量或功能状态,但效应大小较小。
尽管这些计划可能会降低总体医疗保健成本,但关于这些计划成本的已发表数据不足以对其成本效益做出确定性评论。
各种各样的二级预防计划可改善冠心病患者的健康结局。