Wales Heart Research Institute, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF144XN, UK.
Heart. 2013 Jul;99(13):911-3. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2013-303705. Epub 2013 May 4.
No trial of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) following myocardial infarction (MI) (not even the WHO European collaborative) demonstrates significant reduction of mortality, as do trials of secondary prevention. There is potential conflict of interest when therapists report self-evaluations. Reviews of published reports exaggerate publication bias. Meta-analyses show no significant effect of CR on mortality in recent years - since 1990, 23 trials, 6527 patients, relative risk 1.01 (0.88-1.15). It does no service to MI patients - or rehabilitation therapists - to repeat claims derived from poolings of historic trials, undertaken before many significant advances in diagnosis, acute treatment and effective secondary prevention. While CR has a role in good medical/nursing practice and continuity of care, rehabilitation therapists could be more effective elsewhere in the NHS.
没有一项心肌梗死后的心脏康复(CR)试验(甚至世界卫生组织欧洲合作试验也没有)能够证明死亡率显著降低,二级预防试验也是如此。当治疗师报告自我评估时,可能存在利益冲突。对已发表报告的综述夸大了发表偏倚。荟萃分析显示,近年来 CR 对死亡率没有显著影响——自 1990 年以来,23 项试验,6527 名患者,相对风险 1.01(0.88-1.15)。重复从历史试验汇总中得出的结论,对 MI 患者或康复治疗师没有任何帮助,这些历史试验是在诊断、急性治疗和有效二级预防取得许多重大进展之前进行的。虽然 CR 在良好的医疗/护理实践和护理连续性中具有作用,但康复治疗师在国民保健制度的其他地方可能会更有效。