College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
School of Health and Wellbeing, College of Medical, Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Eur J Heart Fail. 2023 Dec;25(12):2263-2273. doi: 10.1002/ejhf.3046. Epub 2023 Oct 31.
Despite strong evidence, access to exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (ExCR) remains low across global healthcare systems. We provide a contemporary update of the Cochrane review randomized trial evidence for ExCR for adults with heart failure (HF) and compare different delivery modes: centre-based, home-based (including digital support), and both (hybrid).
Databases, bibliographies of previous systematic reviews and included trials, and trials registers were searched with no language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials, recruiting adults with HF, assigned to either ExCR or a no-exercise control group, with follow-up of ≥6 months were included. Two review authors independently screened titles for inclusion, extracted trial and patient characteristics, outcome data, and assessed risk of bias. Outcomes of mortality, hospitalization, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were pooled across trials using meta-analysis at short-term (≤12 months) and long-term follow-up (>12 months) and stratified by delivery mode. Sixty trials (8728 participants) were included. In the short term, compared to control, ExCR did not impact all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-1.21), reduced all-cause hospitalization (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.56-0.86, number needed to treat: 13, 95% CI 9-22), and was associated with a clinically important improvement in HRQoL measured by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLWHF) overall score (mean difference: -7.39; 95% CI -10.30 to -4.47). Improvements in outcomes with ExCR was seen across centre, home (including digitally supported), and hybrid settings. A similar pattern of results was seen in the long term (mortality: RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.72-1.04; all-cause hospitalization: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70-1.01, MLWHF: -9.59, 95% CI -17.48 to -1.50).
To improve global suboptimal levels of uptake for HF patients, global healthcare systems need to routinely recommend ExCR and offer a choice of mode of delivery, dependent on an individual patient's level of risk and complexity.
尽管有确凿的证据,但在全球医疗保健系统中,接受基于运动的心脏康复(ExCR)的机会仍然很低。我们提供了 Cochrane 综述随机试验证据的最新更新,用于患有心力衰竭(HF)的成年人的 ExCR,并比较了不同的提供模式:中心模式、家庭模式(包括数字支持)和两者结合的混合模式。
我们对数据库、以前的系统评价和纳入试验的参考文献以及试验登记处进行了无语言限制的搜索。纳入了随机对照试验,招募了患有 HF 的成年人,将其分配到 ExCR 或不进行运动的对照组,随访时间≥6 个月。两名审查作者独立筛选标题以纳入,提取试验和患者特征、结局数据,并评估偏倚风险。使用荟萃分析在短期(≤12 个月)和长期(>12 个月)随访中汇总死亡率、住院率和健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)的结局,并按提供模式进行分层。共纳入 60 项试验(8728 名参与者)。在短期内,与对照组相比,ExCR 并未影响全因死亡率(相对风险 [RR] 0.93;95%置信区间 [CI] 0.71-1.21),降低了全因住院率(RR 0.69;95% CI 0.56-0.86,需要治疗的人数:13,95% CI 9-22),并且与明尼苏达州心力衰竭生活质量问卷(MLWHF)整体评分(平均差异:-7.39;95% CI -10.30 至 -4.47)所测量的 HRQoL 有临床意义的改善相关。在中心、家庭(包括数字支持)和混合环境中,都可以看到 ExCR 改善结局的效果。在长期(死亡率:RR 0.87,95% CI 0.72-1.04;全因住院率:RR 0.84,95% CI 0.70-1.01,MLWHF:-9.59,95% CI -17.48 至 -1.50)也观察到了类似的结果模式。
为了提高全球 HF 患者接受程度不理想的水平,全球医疗保健系统需要常规推荐 ExCR,并根据患者的风险和复杂性水平提供多种提供模式的选择。