Evaluating the Effectiveness of Home based versus Comprehensive Cardiac Rehabilitation on Mortality in Myocardial Infarction Survivors.

IF 1.8 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
International Journal of Preventive Medicine Pub Date : 2026-01-31 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.4103/ijpvm.ijpvm_23_24
Fereshteh Beheshti-Nia, Masoumeh Sadeghi, Alireza Ansari-Moghaddam, Mahdi Mohammadi, Hassan Okati-Aliabad, Ghasem Yadegarfar
{"title":"Evaluating the Effectiveness of Home based versus Comprehensive Cardiac Rehabilitation on Mortality in Myocardial Infarction Survivors.","authors":"Fereshteh Beheshti-Nia, Masoumeh Sadeghi, Alireza Ansari-Moghaddam, Mahdi Mohammadi, Hassan Okati-Aliabad, Ghasem Yadegarfar","doi":"10.4103/ijpvm.ijpvm_23_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Myocardial infarction (MI) is a health concern with different mortality rates even with advanced treatment. Home care is a new approach for monitoring and providing care to MI patients after discharge. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of home based versus comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation recommendations on mortality among MI survivors.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This randomized clinical trial at Cardiac Rehabilitation Research Center, Isfahan, involved myocardial infarction survivors. Participants were divided into intervention (home based CR) and control (comprehensive CR) groups with a block randomization method. Mortality, returning to work, and rehospitalization rates of both groups were assessed and compared at 6, 12, and 60 months after MI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Totally 259 participants were included in this study. Baseline variables were relatively similar in both groups. The odds of death in home care were 45% less than the control group (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.21 - 1.45, <i>P</i> = 0.229), and the odds of death changed 1,09 times by increasing each year of patients (OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.01 - 1.18, <i>P</i> = 0.027). Also, returning to work was significantly higher in the intervention group during the 0-6-month period (intervention group = 99.08% vs. control group = 92.31% <i>P</i> = 0.032).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study found a 45% lower risk of death in the home based group, which was not statistically significant, possibly due to sample size limitations. However, the rate of returning to work activity was higher in the home based CR group. The home based method can be chosen as an alternative to comprehensive CR based on decision-making with the patient, specialists, and caregivers.</p>","PeriodicalId":14342,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Preventive Medicine","volume":"17 ","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12919855/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Preventive Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/ijpvm.ijpvm_23_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Myocardial infarction (MI) is a health concern with different mortality rates even with advanced treatment. Home care is a new approach for monitoring and providing care to MI patients after discharge. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of home based versus comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation recommendations on mortality among MI survivors.

Method: This randomized clinical trial at Cardiac Rehabilitation Research Center, Isfahan, involved myocardial infarction survivors. Participants were divided into intervention (home based CR) and control (comprehensive CR) groups with a block randomization method. Mortality, returning to work, and rehospitalization rates of both groups were assessed and compared at 6, 12, and 60 months after MI.

Results: Totally 259 participants were included in this study. Baseline variables were relatively similar in both groups. The odds of death in home care were 45% less than the control group (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.21 - 1.45, P = 0.229), and the odds of death changed 1,09 times by increasing each year of patients (OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.01 - 1.18, P = 0.027). Also, returning to work was significantly higher in the intervention group during the 0-6-month period (intervention group = 99.08% vs. control group = 92.31% P = 0.032).

Conclusions: The study found a 45% lower risk of death in the home based group, which was not statistically significant, possibly due to sample size limitations. However, the rate of returning to work activity was higher in the home based CR group. The home based method can be chosen as an alternative to comprehensive CR based on decision-making with the patient, specialists, and caregivers.

评估家庭康复与综合心脏康复对心肌梗死幸存者死亡率的影响。
背景:心肌梗死(MI)是一种健康问题,即使经过先进的治疗,其死亡率也不同。家庭护理是对心肌梗死患者出院后进行监护和提供护理的一种新方法。本研究旨在评估家庭康复与综合心脏康复建议对心肌梗死幸存者死亡率的影响。方法:这项在伊斯法罕心脏康复研究中心进行的随机临床试验涉及心肌梗死幸存者。采用分组随机方法将参与者分为干预组(基于家庭的CR)和对照组(综合CR)。在心肌梗死后6个月、12个月和60个月,对两组患者的死亡率、重返工作岗位率和再住院率进行评估和比较。结果:本研究共纳入259名参与者。两组的基线变量相对相似。家庭护理组的死亡几率比对照组低45% (OR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.21 ~ 1.45, P = 0.229),死亡几率随患者年龄的逐年增加而变化1.09倍(OR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.01 ~ 1.18, P = 0.027)。干预组0 ~ 6个月的复工率明显高于对照组(P = 0.032)(干预组= 99.08%,对照组= 92.31%)。结论:研究发现,家庭护理组的死亡风险降低了45%,这在统计学上并不显著,可能是由于样本量的限制。然而,在以家庭为基础的CR组中,重返工作活动的比率更高。以家庭为基础的方法可以作为基于患者、专家和护理人员决策的综合CR的替代方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Preventive Medicine
International Journal of Preventive Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.80%
发文量
107
期刊介绍: International Journal of Preventive Medicine, a publication of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, is a peer-reviewed online journal with Continuous print on demand compilation of issues published. The journal’s full text is available online at http://www.ijpvmjournal.net. The journal allows free access (Open Access) to its contents and permits authors to self-archive final accepted version of the articles on any OAI-compliant institutional / subject-based repository. The journal will cover technical and clinical studies related to health, ethical and social issues in field of Preventive Medicine. Articles with clinical interest and implications will be given preference.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书