Yash B Patel, Agara Kumar, Marianne Huebner, Mohammed El Nayir, Anupam Suneja, Frank Smith
{"title":"Mortality and Readmission Outcomes for Intensive and Conventional Cardiac Rehabilitation (MR-OFICR) Study.","authors":"Yash B Patel, Agara Kumar, Marianne Huebner, Mohammed El Nayir, Anupam Suneja, Frank Smith","doi":"10.55729/2000-9666.1514","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Cardiac rehabilitation programs are offered in two major formats: Conventional Cardiac Rehab (CCR), which is primarily based on exercise interventions, and Intensive Cardiac Rehabilitation (ICR), which is a holistic approach including dietary modifications with a plant-based diet and wellness counseling. We performed a retrospective cohort study to compare the CCR and ICR groups for the primary composite outcome of Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) at two years. The MACE outcome was 2-year mortality, unstable angina requiring hospitalization, Myocardial Infarction (MI), Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG), Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI), and stroke. Secondary outcomes were overall mortality, and number of readmissions. There were 2104 patients included in the statistical analysis with 963 in the CCR group and 1141 in the ICR group. We found that there were no significant differences in MACE events between ICR and CCR (OR = 1.10; 95 % CI = 0.81-1.49; p = 0.55). Readmissions were higher in the ICR group than the CCR group, with 34.1 % vs 28.6 % (p = 0.006), respectively. Additionally, older age was associated with more MACE events (OR = 1.16; 95 % CI = 1.07-1.25; p < 0.001). Overall, our study did not demonstrate a difference in the composite MACE outcome between ICR and CCR.</p>","PeriodicalId":15460,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community Hospital Internal Medicine Perspectives","volume":"15 4","pages":"8-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12315907/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community Hospital Internal Medicine Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55729/2000-9666.1514","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Cardiac rehabilitation programs are offered in two major formats: Conventional Cardiac Rehab (CCR), which is primarily based on exercise interventions, and Intensive Cardiac Rehabilitation (ICR), which is a holistic approach including dietary modifications with a plant-based diet and wellness counseling. We performed a retrospective cohort study to compare the CCR and ICR groups for the primary composite outcome of Major Adverse Cardiac Event (MACE) at two years. The MACE outcome was 2-year mortality, unstable angina requiring hospitalization, Myocardial Infarction (MI), Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG), Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI), and stroke. Secondary outcomes were overall mortality, and number of readmissions. There were 2104 patients included in the statistical analysis with 963 in the CCR group and 1141 in the ICR group. We found that there were no significant differences in MACE events between ICR and CCR (OR = 1.10; 95 % CI = 0.81-1.49; p = 0.55). Readmissions were higher in the ICR group than the CCR group, with 34.1 % vs 28.6 % (p = 0.006), respectively. Additionally, older age was associated with more MACE events (OR = 1.16; 95 % CI = 1.07-1.25; p < 0.001). Overall, our study did not demonstrate a difference in the composite MACE outcome between ICR and CCR.
期刊介绍:
JCHIMP provides: up-to-date information in the field of Internal Medicine to community hospital medical professionals a platform for clinical faculty, residents, and medical students to publish research relevant to community hospital programs. Manuscripts that explore aspects of medicine at community hospitals welcome, including but not limited to: the best practices of community academic programs community hospital-based research opinion and insight from community hospital leadership and faculty the scholarly work of residents and medical students affiliated with community hospitals.