Home‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation Alone and Hybrid With Center‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation in Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Background Center‐based cardiac rehabilitation (CBCR) has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF). Home‐based cardiac rehabilitation (HBCR) can be an alternative to increase access for patients who cannot participate in CBCR. Hybrid cardiac rehabilitation (CR) combines sho...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hafiz M. Imran, Muhammad Baig, Sebhat Erqou, Tracey H. Taveira, Nishant R. Shah, Alan Morrison, Gaurav Choudhary, Wen‐Chih Wu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2019-08-01
Series:Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.119.012779
_version_ 1818315105609187328
author Hafiz M. Imran
Muhammad Baig
Sebhat Erqou
Tracey H. Taveira
Nishant R. Shah
Alan Morrison
Gaurav Choudhary
Wen‐Chih Wu
author_facet Hafiz M. Imran
Muhammad Baig
Sebhat Erqou
Tracey H. Taveira
Nishant R. Shah
Alan Morrison
Gaurav Choudhary
Wen‐Chih Wu
author_sort Hafiz M. Imran
collection DOAJ
description Background Center‐based cardiac rehabilitation (CBCR) has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF). Home‐based cardiac rehabilitation (HBCR) can be an alternative to increase access for patients who cannot participate in CBCR. Hybrid cardiac rehabilitation (CR) combines short‐term CBCR with HBCR, potentially allowing both flexibility and rigor. However, recent data comparing these initiatives have not been synthesized. Methods and Results We performed a meta‐analysis to compare functional capacity and health‐related quality of life (hr‐QOL) outcomes in HF for (1) HBCR and usual care, (2) hybrid CR and usual care, and (3) HBCR and CBCR. A systematic search in 5 standard databases for randomized controlled trials was performed through January 31, 2019. Summary estimates were pooled using fixed‐ or random‐effects (when I2>50%) meta‐analyses. Standardized mean differences (95% CI) were used for distinct hr‐QOL tools. We identified 31 randomized controlled trials with a total of 1791 HF participants. Among 18 studies that compared HBCR and usual care, participants in HBCR had improvement of peak oxygen uptake (2.39 mL/kg per minute; 95% CI, 0.28–4.49) and hr‐QOL (16 studies; standardized mean difference: 0.38; 95% CI, 0.19–0.57). Nine RCTs that compared hybrid CR with usual care showed that hybrid CR had greater improvements in peak oxygen uptake (9.72 mL/kg per minute; 95% CI, 5.12–14.33) but not in hr‐QOL (2 studies; standardized mean difference: 0.67; 95% CI, −0.20 to 1.54). Five studies comparing HBCR with CBCR showed similar improvements in functional capacity (0.0 mL/kg per minute; 95% CI, −1.93 to 1.92) and hr‐QOL (4 studies; standardized mean difference: 0.11; 95% CI, −0.12 to 0.34). Conclusions HBCR and hybrid CR significantly improved functional capacity, but only HBCR improved hr‐QOL over usual care. However, both are potential alternatives for patients who are not suitable for CBCR.
first_indexed 2024-12-13T09:00:15Z
format Article
id doaj.art-4fe44425ce8a444fbd90b848b40cf95c
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2047-9980
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-13T09:00:15Z
publishDate 2019-08-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
spelling doaj.art-4fe44425ce8a444fbd90b848b40cf95c2022-12-21T23:53:10ZengWileyJournal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease2047-99802019-08-0181610.1161/JAHA.119.012779Home‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation Alone and Hybrid With Center‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation in Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta‐AnalysisHafiz M. Imran0Muhammad Baig1Sebhat Erqou2Tracey H. Taveira3Nishant R. Shah4Alan Morrison5Gaurav Choudhary6Wen‐Chih Wu7Providence Veterans Affairs Medical Center Providence RIThe Miriam Hospital Providence RIProvidence Veterans Affairs Medical Center Providence RIProvidence Veterans Affairs Medical Center Providence RIProvidence Veterans Affairs Medical Center Providence RIProvidence Veterans Affairs Medical Center Providence RIProvidence Veterans Affairs Medical Center Providence RIProvidence Veterans Affairs Medical Center Providence RIBackground Center‐based cardiac rehabilitation (CBCR) has been shown to improve outcomes in patients with heart failure (HF). Home‐based cardiac rehabilitation (HBCR) can be an alternative to increase access for patients who cannot participate in CBCR. Hybrid cardiac rehabilitation (CR) combines short‐term CBCR with HBCR, potentially allowing both flexibility and rigor. However, recent data comparing these initiatives have not been synthesized. Methods and Results We performed a meta‐analysis to compare functional capacity and health‐related quality of life (hr‐QOL) outcomes in HF for (1) HBCR and usual care, (2) hybrid CR and usual care, and (3) HBCR and CBCR. A systematic search in 5 standard databases for randomized controlled trials was performed through January 31, 2019. Summary estimates were pooled using fixed‐ or random‐effects (when I2>50%) meta‐analyses. Standardized mean differences (95% CI) were used for distinct hr‐QOL tools. We identified 31 randomized controlled trials with a total of 1791 HF participants. Among 18 studies that compared HBCR and usual care, participants in HBCR had improvement of peak oxygen uptake (2.39 mL/kg per minute; 95% CI, 0.28–4.49) and hr‐QOL (16 studies; standardized mean difference: 0.38; 95% CI, 0.19–0.57). Nine RCTs that compared hybrid CR with usual care showed that hybrid CR had greater improvements in peak oxygen uptake (9.72 mL/kg per minute; 95% CI, 5.12–14.33) but not in hr‐QOL (2 studies; standardized mean difference: 0.67; 95% CI, −0.20 to 1.54). Five studies comparing HBCR with CBCR showed similar improvements in functional capacity (0.0 mL/kg per minute; 95% CI, −1.93 to 1.92) and hr‐QOL (4 studies; standardized mean difference: 0.11; 95% CI, −0.12 to 0.34). Conclusions HBCR and hybrid CR significantly improved functional capacity, but only HBCR improved hr‐QOL over usual care. However, both are potential alternatives for patients who are not suitable for CBCR.https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.119.012779cardiac rehabilitationexerciseheart failuremeta‐analysis
spellingShingle Hafiz M. Imran
Muhammad Baig
Sebhat Erqou
Tracey H. Taveira
Nishant R. Shah
Alan Morrison
Gaurav Choudhary
Wen‐Chih Wu
Home‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation Alone and Hybrid With Center‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation in Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
cardiac rehabilitation
exercise
heart failure
meta‐analysis
title Home‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation Alone and Hybrid With Center‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation in Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
title_full Home‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation Alone and Hybrid With Center‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation in Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
title_fullStr Home‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation Alone and Hybrid With Center‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation in Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Home‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation Alone and Hybrid With Center‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation in Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
title_short Home‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation Alone and Hybrid With Center‐Based Cardiac Rehabilitation in Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis
title_sort home based cardiac rehabilitation alone and hybrid with center based cardiac rehabilitation in heart failure a systematic review and meta analysis
topic cardiac rehabilitation
exercise
heart failure
meta‐analysis
url https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.119.012779
work_keys_str_mv AT hafizmimran homebasedcardiacrehabilitationaloneandhybridwithcenterbasedcardiacrehabilitationinheartfailureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT muhammadbaig homebasedcardiacrehabilitationaloneandhybridwithcenterbasedcardiacrehabilitationinheartfailureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT sebhaterqou homebasedcardiacrehabilitationaloneandhybridwithcenterbasedcardiacrehabilitationinheartfailureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT traceyhtaveira homebasedcardiacrehabilitationaloneandhybridwithcenterbasedcardiacrehabilitationinheartfailureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT nishantrshah homebasedcardiacrehabilitationaloneandhybridwithcenterbasedcardiacrehabilitationinheartfailureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT alanmorrison homebasedcardiacrehabilitationaloneandhybridwithcenterbasedcardiacrehabilitationinheartfailureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT gauravchoudhary homebasedcardiacrehabilitationaloneandhybridwithcenterbasedcardiacrehabilitationinheartfailureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT wenchihwu homebasedcardiacrehabilitationaloneandhybridwithcenterbasedcardiacrehabilitationinheartfailureasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis