1 Department of Medicine, Hospital of Vestfold, Tønsberg, Norway.
2 Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Norway.
Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2017 Sep;24(13):1360-1368. doi: 10.1177/2047487317719355. Epub 2017 Jun 30.
Background Coronary risk factor control in Europe is suboptimal and there are large variations in the nature of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programmes offered to coronary heart disease patients. We aim to explore characteristics and risk factor control in patients recruited from two neighbouring hospitals offering CR with different content. Methods In a cross-sectional study, 1127 Norwegian patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction and/or a revascularization procedure attended a clinical visit and completed a questionnaire at 2-36 months' follow-up. The hospital of Vestfold provides comprehensive CR, while the hospital of Drammen provides mainly exercise-based CR. Results At follow-up, patients in Vestfold performed more physical activity ( p = 0.02), were less obese ( p = 0.02) and reported better medication adherence ( p = 0.02) than patients in Drammen. The perceived need for information and follow-up was higher in Drammen than Vestfold ( p < 0.001). The CR participation rate in Vestfold was 75% compared with 18% in Drammen. CR participation in Vestfold was associated with higher prevalence of smoking cessation ( p = 0.001), lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ( p = 0.01) and better medication adherence ( p = 0.02) compared with non-CR, in adjusted analyses. No differences in diet, body weight, or blood pressure control were found between CR and non-CR. Conclusions Vestfold, with comprehensive CR, had a higher participation rate and more risk factors on target than Drammen. Participation in CR in Vestfold was associated with higher levels of smoking cessation and medication adherence, and lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, but overall risk factor control is still deficient, underlining the need for improved understanding of barriers to optimal risk factor control.
欧洲的冠状动脉风险因素控制不理想,提供给冠心病患者的心脏康复(CR)计划的性质存在很大差异。我们旨在探讨两家提供不同内容的 CR 计划的毗邻医院招募的患者的特征和风险因素控制情况。
在一项横断面研究中,1127 名挪威急性心肌梗死和/或血运重建手术后住院的患者在 2-36 个月的随访中接受了临床访问并完成了问卷调查。Vestfold 医院提供全面的 CR,而 Drammen 医院主要提供基于运动的 CR。
在随访时,Vestfold 医院的患者进行了更多的身体活动(p=0.02),肥胖程度更低(p=0.02),药物依从性更好(p=0.02),而 Drammen 医院的患者则不然。与 Vestfold 相比,Drammen 医院的患者对信息和随访的需求更高(p<0.001)。Vestfold 的 CR 参与率为 75%,而 Drammen 仅为 18%。在调整分析中,与非 CR 组相比,Vestfold 的 CR 参与与更高的戒烟率(p=0.001)、更低的低密度脂蛋白胆固醇(p=0.01)和更好的药物依从性(p=0.02)相关。CR 组和非 CR 组之间的饮食、体重或血压控制没有差异。
Vestfold 提供全面的 CR,其参与率更高,目标风险因素更多。Vestfold 的 CR 参与与更高的戒烟率和药物依从性以及更低的低密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平相关,但整体风险因素控制仍然不足,这突显了需要更好地了解影响最佳风险因素控制的障碍。