Exercise-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation in Twelve European Countries Results of the European Cardiac Rehabilitation Registry

AIM: Results from EuroCaReD study should serve as a benchmark to improve guideline adherence and treatment quality of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in Europe. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 2.054 CR patients in 12 European countries were derived from 69 centres. 76% were male. Indication for CR differed between countries being predominantly ACS in Switzerland (79%), Portugal (62%) and Germany (61%), elective PCI in Greece (37%), Austria (36%) and Spain (32%), and CABG in Croatia and Russia (36%). A minority of patients presented with chronic heart failure (4%). At CR start, most patients already were under medication according to current guidelines for the treatment of CV risk factors. A wide range of CR programme designs was found (duration 3 to 24weeks; total number of sessions 30 to 196). Patient programme adherence after admission was high (85%). With reservations that eCRF follow-up data exchange remained incomplete, patient CV risk profiles experienced only small improvements. CR success as defined by an increase of exercise capacity >25W was significantly higher in young patients and those who were employed. Results differed by countries. After CR only 9% of patients were admitted to a structured post-CR programme. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical characteristics of CR patients, indications and programmes in Europe are different. Guideline adherence is poor. Thus, patient selection and CR programme designs should become more evidence-based. Routine eCRF documentation of CR results throughout European countries was not sufficient in its first application because of incomplete data exchange. Therefore better adherence of CR centres to minimal routine clinical standards is requested

The effectiveness of modern cardiac rehabilitation : A systematic review of recent observational studies in non-attenders versus attenders

BACKGROUND: The beneficial effects of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) have been challenged in recent years and there is now a need to investigate whether current CR programmes, delivered in the context of modern cardiology, still benefit patients. METHODS: A systematic review of non-randomised controlled studies was conducted. Electronic searches of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, science citation index (web of science), CIRRIE and Open Grey were undertaken. Non-randomised studies investigating the effects of CR were included when recruitment occurred from the year 2000 onwards in accordance with significant CR guidance changes from the late 1990's. Adult patients diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) were included. Non-English articles were considered. Two reviewers independently screened articles according to pre-defined selection criteria as reported in the PROSPERO database (CRD42015024021). RESULTS: Out of 2,656 articles, 8 studies involving 9,836 AMI patients were included. Studies were conducted in 6 countries. CR was found to reduce the risk of all-cause and cardiac-related mortality and improve Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) significantly in at least one domain. The benefits of CR in terms of recurrent MI were inconsistent and no significant effects were found regarding re-vascularisation or re-hospitalisation following AMI. CONCLUSION: Recent observational evidence draws different conclusions to the most current reviews of trial data with respect to total mortality and re-hospitalisation, questioning the representativeness of historic data in the modern cardiological era. Future work should seek to clarify which patient and service level factors determine the likelihood of achieving improved all-cause and cardiac mortality and reduced hospital re-admissions