Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation improves exercise capacity and health-related quality of life in people with atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised trials

Objective: The aim of this study was to undertake a contemporary review of the impact of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) targeted at patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Methods: We conducted searches of PubMED, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library of Controlled Trials (up until 30 November 2017) using key terms related to exercise-based CR and AF. Randomised and non-randomised controlled trials were included if they compared the effects of an exercise-based CR intervention to a no exercise or usual care control group. Meta-analyses of outcomes were conducted where appropriate. Results: The nine randomised trials included 959 (483 exercise-based CR vs 476 controls) patients with various types of AF. Compared with control, pooled analysis showed no difference in all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 1.08, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.53, p=0.64) following exercise-based CR. However, there were improvements in health-related quality of life (mean SF-36 mental component score (MCS): 4.00, 95% CI 0.26 to 7.74; p=0.04 and mean SF-36 physical component score: 1.82, 95% CI 0.06 to 3.59; p=0.04) and exercise capacity (mean peak VO2: 1.59 ml/kg/min, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.08; p=0.04; mean 6 min walk test: 46.9 m, 95% CI 26.4 to 67.4; p<0.001) with exercise-based CR. Improvements were also seen in AF symptom burden and markers of cardiac function. Conclusions: Exercise capacity, cardiac function, symptom burden and health-related quality of life were improved with exercise-based CR in the short term (up to 6 months) targeted at patients with AF. However, high-quality multicentre randomised trials are needed to clarify the impact of exercise-based CR on key patient and health system outcomes (including health-related quality of life, mortality, hospitalisation and costs) and how these effects may vary across AF subtypes

Atrial Fibrillation Specific Exercise Rehabilitation: Are We There Yet?

Regular physical activity and exercise training are integral for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Despite recent advances in more holistic care pathways for people with atrial fibrillation (AF), exercise rehabilitation is not provided as part of routine care. The most recent European Society of Cardiology report for AF management states that patients should be encouraged to undertake moderate-intensity exercise and remain physically active to prevent AF incidence or recurrence. The aim of this review was to collate data from primary trials identified in three systematic reviews and recent real-world cohort studies to propose an AF-specific exercise rehabilitation guideline. Collating data from 21 studies, we propose that 360-720 metabolic equivalent (MET)-minutes/week, corresponding to ~60-120 min of exercise per week at moderate-to-vigorous intensity, could be an evidence-based recommendation for patients with AF to improve AF-specific outcomes, quality of life, and possibly prevent long-term major adverse cardiovascular events. Furthermore, non-traditional, low-moderate intensity exercise, such as Yoga, seems to have promising benefits on patient quality of life and possibly physical capacity and should, therefore, be considered in a personalised rehabilitation programme. Finally, we discuss the interesting concepts of short-term exercise-induced cardioprotection and 'none-response' to exercise training with reference to AF rehabilitation

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for adults after heart valve surgery:review

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation may benefit heart valve surgery patients. We conducted a systematic review to assess the evidence for the use of exercise-based intervention programmes following heart valve surgery.To assess the benefits and harms of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation compared with no exercise training intervention, or treatment as usual, in adults following heart valve surgery. We considered programmes including exercise training with or without another intervention (such as a psycho-educational component).We searched: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE); MEDLINE (Ovid); EMBASE (Ovid); CINAHL (EBSCO); PsycINFO (Ovid); LILACS (Bireme); and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-S (CPCI-S) on Web of Science (Thomson Reuters) on 23 March 2015. We handsearched Web of Science, bibliographies of systematic reviews and trial registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, Controlled-trials.com, and The World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform).We included randomised clinical trials that investigated exercise-based interventions compared with no exercise intervention control. The trial participants comprised adults aged 18 years or older who had undergone heart valve surgery for heart valve disease (from any cause) and received either heart valve replacement, or heart valve repair.Two authors independently extracted data. We assessed the risk of systematic errors ('bias') by evaluation of bias risk domains. Clinical and statistical heterogeneity were assessed. Meta-analyses were undertaken using both fixed-effect and random-effects models. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence. We sought to assess the risk of random errors with trial sequential analysis.We included two trials from 1987 and 2004 with a total 148 participants who have had heart valve surgery. Both trials had a high risk of bias.There was insufficient evidence at 3 to 6 months follow-up to judge the effect of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to no exercise on mortality (RR 4.46 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.22 to 90.78); participants = 104; studies = 1; quality of evidence: very low) and on serious adverse events (RR 1.15 (95% CI 0.37 to 3.62); participants = 148; studies = 2; quality of evidence: very low). Included trials did not report on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and the secondary outcomes of New York Heart Association class, left ventricular ejection fraction and cost. We did find that, compared with control (no exercise), exercise-based rehabilitation may increase exercise capacity (SMD -0.47, 95% CI -0.81 to -0.13; participants = 140; studies = 2, quality of evidence: moderate). There was insufficient evidence at 12 months follow-up for the return to work outcome (RR 0.55 (95% CI 0.19 to 1.56); participants = 44; studies = 1; quality of evidence: low). Due to limited information, trial sequential analysis could not be performed as planned.Our findings suggest that exercise-based rehabilitation for adults after heart valve surgery, compared with no exercise, may improve exercise capacity. Due to a lack of evidence, we cannot evaluate the impact on other outcomes. Further high-quality randomised clinical trials are needed in order to assess the impact of exercise-based rehabilitation on patient-relevant outcomes, including mortality and quality of life

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for adults with atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND:Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation may benefit adults with atrial fibrillation or those who had been treated for atrial fibrillation. Atrial fibrillation is caused by multiple micro re-entry circuits within the atrial tissue, which result in chaotic rapid activity in the atria. OBJECTIVES:To assess the benefits and harms of exercise-based rehabilitation programmes, alone or with another intervention, compared with no-exercise training controls in adults who currently have AF, or have been treated for AF. SEARCH METHODS:We searched the following electronic databases; CENTRAL and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness (DARE) in the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Ovid, PsycINFO Ovid, Web of Science Core Collection Thomson Reuters, CINAHL EBSCO, LILACS Bireme, and three clinical trial registers on 14 July 2016. We also checked the bibliographies of relevant systematic reviews identified by the searches. We imposed no language restrictions. SELECTION CRITERIA:We included randomised controlled trials (RCT) that investigated exercise-based interventions compared with any type of no-exercise control. We included trials that included adults aged 18 years or older with atrial fibrillation, or post-treatment for atrial fibrillation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:Two authors independently extracted data. We assessed the risk of bias using the domains outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We assessed clinical and statistical heterogeneity by visual inspection of the forest plots, and by using standard Chi² and I² statistics. We performed meta-analyses using fixed-effect and random-effects models; we used standardised mean differences where different scales were used for the same outcome. We assessed the risk of random errors with trial sequential analysis (TSA) and used the GRADE methodology to rate the quality of evidence, reporting it in the 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS:We included six RCTs with a total of 421 patients with various types of atrial fibrillation. All trials were conducted between 2006 and 2016, and had short follow-up (eight weeks to six months). Risks of bias ranged from high risk to low risk.The exercise-based programmes in four trials consisted of both aerobic exercise and resistance training, in one trial consisted of Qi-gong (slow and graceful movements), and in another trial, consisted of inspiratory muscle training.For mortality, very low-quality evidence from six trials suggested no clear difference in deaths between the exercise and no-exercise groups (relative risk (RR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 15.78; participants = 421; I² = 0%; deaths = 2). Very low-quality evidence from five trials suggested no clear difference between groups for serious adverse events (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.05; participants = 381; I² = 0%; events = 8). Low-quality evidence from two trials suggested no clear difference in health-related quality of life for the Short Form-36 (SF-36) physical component summary measure (mean difference (MD) 1.96, 95% CI -2.50 to 6.42; participants = 224; I² = 69%), or the SF-36 mental component summary measure (MD 1.99, 95% CI -0.48 to 4.46; participants = 224; I² = 0%). Exercise capacity was assessed by cumulated work, or maximal power (Watt), obtained by cycle ergometer, or by six minute walking test, or ergospirometry testing measuring VO2 peak. We found moderate-quality evidence from two studies that exercise-based rehabilitation increased exercise capacity, measured by VO2 peak, more than no exercise (MD 3.76, 95% CI 1.37 to 6.15; participants = 208; I² = 0%); and very low-quality evidence from four studies that exercise-based rehabilitation increased exercise capacity more than no exercise, measured by the six-minute walking test (MD 75.76, 95% CI 14.00 to 137.53; participants = 272; I² = 85%). When we combined the different assessment tools for exercise capacity, we found very low-quality evidence from six trials that exercise-based rehabilitation increased exercise capacity more than no exercise (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.86, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.26; participants = 359; I² = 65%). Overall, the quality of the evidence for the outcomes ranged from moderate to very-low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Due to few randomised patients and outcomes, we could not evaluate the real impact of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation on mortality or serious adverse events. The evidence showed no clinically relevant effect on health-related quality of life. Pooled data showed a positive effect on the surrogate outcome of physical exercise capacity, but due to the low number of patients and the moderate to very low-quality of the underpinning evidence, we could not be certain of the magnitude of the effect. Future high-quality randomised trials are needed to assess the benefits and harms of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for adults with atrial fibrillation on patient-relevant outcomes

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for adults with atrial fibrillation

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: The aim of this review is to assess the benefits and harms of rehabilitation programmes consisting of a physical exercise component that focuses on increasing exercise capacity, and may include a psychoeducational intervention that focuses on improving mental health and the patient’s self management skills, compared with no intervention or treatment as usual in adults who currently have AF or have been treated for AF

ICU-recovery in Scandinavia : a comparative study of intensive care follow-up in Denmark, Norway and Sweden

OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to describe and compare models of intensive care follow-up in Denmark, Norway and Sweden to help inform clinicians regarding the establishment and continuation of ICU aftercare programmes.METHODS: Our study had a multi-centre comparative qualitative design with triangulation of sources, methods and investigators. We combined prospective data from semi-structured key-informant telephone interviews and unreported data from a precursory investigation.RESULTS: Four basic models of follow-up were identified representing nurse-led or multidisciplinary programmes with or without the provision of patient diaries. A conceptual model was constructed including a catalogue of interventions related to the illness trajectory. We identified three temporal areas for follow-up directed towards the past, present or future.CONCLUSIONS: ICU follow-up programmes in the Scandinavian countries have evolved as bottom-up initiatives conducted on a semi-voluntary basis. We suggest reframing follow-up as an integral part of patient therapy. The Scandinavian programmes focus on the human experience of critical illness, with more attention to understanding the past than looking towards the future. We recommend harmonization of programmes with clear goals enabling programme assessment, while moving towards a paradigm of empowerment, enabling patient and family to take an active role in their recovery and wellbeing

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for adults after heart valve surgery

BACKGROUND: The impact of exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) following heart valve surgery is uncertain. We conducted an update of this systematic review and a meta‐analysis to assess randomised controlled trial evidence for the use of exercise‐based CR following heart valve surgery. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of exercise‐based CR compared with no exercise training in adults following heart valve surgery or repair, including both percutaneous and surgical procedures. We considered CR programmes consisting of exercise training with or without another intervention (such as an intervention with a psycho‐educational component). SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials (CENTRAL), in the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE (Ovid); Embase (Ovid); the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; EBSCO); PsycINFO (Ovid); Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS; Bireme); and Conference Proceedings Citation Index‐Science (CPCI‐S) on the Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics) on 10 January 2020. We searched for ongoing trials from ClinicalTrials.gov, Clinical‐trials.com, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform on 15 May 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that compared exercise‐based CR interventions with no exercise training. Trial participants comprised adults aged 18 years or older who had undergone heart valve surgery for heart valve disease (from any cause) and had received heart valve replacement or heart valve repair. Both percutaneous and surgical procedures were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data. We assessed the risk of systematic errors (‘bias’) by evaluating risk domains using the 'Risk of bias' (RoB2) tool. We assessed clinical and statistical heterogeneity. We performed meta‐analyses using both fixed‐effect and random‐effects models. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of evidence for primary outcomes (all‐cause mortality, all‐cause hospitalisation, and health‐related quality of life). MAIN RESULTS: We included six trials with a total of 364 participants who have had open or percutaneous heart valve surgery. For this updated review, we identified four additional trials (216 participants). One trial had an overall low risk of bias, and we classified the remaining five trials as having some concerns. Follow‐up ranged across included trials from 3 to 24 months. Based on data at longest follow‐up, a total of nine participants died: 4 CR versus 5 control (relative risk (RR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.26 to 2.68; 2 trials, 131 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low). No trials reported on cardiovascular mortality. One trial reported one cardiac‐related hospitalisation in the CR group and none in the control group (RR 2.72, 95% CI 0.11 to 65.56; 1 trial, 122 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low). We are uncertain about health‐related quality of life at completion of the intervention in CR compared to control (Short Form (SF)‐12/36 mental component: mean difference (MD) 1.28, 95% CI ‐1.60 to 4.16; 2 trials, 150 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low; and SF‐12/36 physical component: MD 2.99, 95% CI ‐5.24 to 11.21; 2 trials, 150 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low), or at longest follow‐up (SF‐12/36 mental component: MD ‐1.45, 95% CI ‐4.70 to 1.80; 2 trials, 139 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low; and SF‐12/36 physical component: MD ‐0.87, 95% CI ‐3.57 to 1.83; 2 trials, 139 participants; GRADE quality of evidence very low).  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Due to lack of evidence and the very low quality of available evidence, this updated review is uncertain about the impact of exercise‐CR in this population in terms of mortality, hospitalisation, and health‐related quality of life. High‐quality (low risk of bias) evidence on the impact of CR is needed to inform clinical guidelines and routine practice