Interventions to Promote Utilisation of Cardiac Rehabilitation: 2026 Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

IF 2.5 4区 医学 Q2 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Linda Long, Cho Zin Lin, Philippa Davies, Valerie Wells, Sherry L Grace, Rod S Taylor
{"title":"Interventions to Promote Utilisation of Cardiac Rehabilitation: 2026 Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Linda Long, Cho Zin Lin, Philippa Davies, Valerie Wells, Sherry L Grace, Rod S Taylor","doi":"10.1016/j.hlc.2026.03.068","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite strong evidence of benefit and guideline recommendation, access to cardiac rehabilitation remains low across global healthcare systems. We provide a 2026 analysis of our previous Cochrane review of randomised trial evidence for interventions designed to increase cardiac rehabilitation enrolment, adherence, and completion.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CPCI-S, and trial registries up to 10 March 2025, without language restrictions. We included randomised controlled trials involving adults eligible for cardiac rehabilitation following myocardial infarction, angina, coronary revascularisation, or heart failure. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool, and certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Data on cardiac rehabilitation enrolment, adherence, and completion were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 47 trials involving 10,803 participants were included. Most common intervention strategies included: education, self-management training, or motivational interviewing; alternative delivery models (home-based, digital, or hybrid); invitation letters or messaging prompts; and peer support. Compared to control, interventions showed improvements in cardiac rehabilitation program enrolment (relative risk [RR]: 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11 to 1.29; participants; 27 trials, 7,216 participants; low-certainty evidence), cardiac rehabilitation program adherence (standardised mean difference: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.49; 18 trials, 3,024 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and cardiac rehabilitation completion (RR:1.22, 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.35; 19 trials, participants: 5,432; moderate-certainty evidence).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>To overcome the persistent challenge of suboptimal cardiac rehabilitation utilisation, global healthcare systems should consider a multifaceted approach to improving cardiac rehabilitation utilisation that combines patient- and system-level intervention strategies identified in this review. Further high-quality trials targeting underserved populations are needed in order to optimise equity in future cardiac rehabilitation access.</p>","PeriodicalId":13000,"journal":{"name":"Heart, Lung and Circulation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Heart, Lung and Circulation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlc.2026.03.068","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite strong evidence of benefit and guideline recommendation, access to cardiac rehabilitation remains low across global healthcare systems. We provide a 2026 analysis of our previous Cochrane review of randomised trial evidence for interventions designed to increase cardiac rehabilitation enrolment, adherence, and completion.

Methods: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CPCI-S, and trial registries up to 10 March 2025, without language restrictions. We included randomised controlled trials involving adults eligible for cardiac rehabilitation following myocardial infarction, angina, coronary revascularisation, or heart failure. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tool, and certainty of evidence assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Data on cardiac rehabilitation enrolment, adherence, and completion were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.

Results: A total of 47 trials involving 10,803 participants were included. Most common intervention strategies included: education, self-management training, or motivational interviewing; alternative delivery models (home-based, digital, or hybrid); invitation letters or messaging prompts; and peer support. Compared to control, interventions showed improvements in cardiac rehabilitation program enrolment (relative risk [RR]: 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11 to 1.29; participants; 27 trials, 7,216 participants; low-certainty evidence), cardiac rehabilitation program adherence (standardised mean difference: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.15 to 0.49; 18 trials, 3,024 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and cardiac rehabilitation completion (RR:1.22, 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.35; 19 trials, participants: 5,432; moderate-certainty evidence).

Conclusions: To overcome the persistent challenge of suboptimal cardiac rehabilitation utilisation, global healthcare systems should consider a multifaceted approach to improving cardiac rehabilitation utilisation that combines patient- and system-level intervention strategies identified in this review. Further high-quality trials targeting underserved populations are needed in order to optimise equity in future cardiac rehabilitation access.

促进心脏康复利用的干预措施:2026 Cochrane系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:尽管有强有力的益处证据和指南推荐,但在全球卫生保健系统中,心脏康复的可及性仍然很低。我们对之前Cochrane综述的随机试验证据进行了2026年的分析,这些随机试验证据旨在提高心脏康复的入组率、依从性和完成度。方法:我们检索了截至2025年3月10日的CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、CPCI-S和试验注册库,无语言限制。我们纳入了随机对照试验,涉及心肌梗死、心绞痛、冠状动脉血管重建术或心力衰竭后符合心脏康复条件的成年人。使用Cochrane工具评估偏倚风险,使用分级建议评估、发展和评估(GRADE)框架评估证据的确定性。心脏康复入组、依从性和完成度的数据采用随机效应荟萃分析。结果:共纳入47项试验,10803名受试者。最常见的干预策略包括:教育、自我管理培训或动机性访谈;可选择的交付模式(家庭、数字或混合);邀请函或短信提示;还有同伴支持。与对照组相比,干预措施改善了心脏康复计划的入组情况(相对危险度[RR]: 1.19, 95%可信区间[CI]: 1.11至1.29;受试者;27项试验,7,216名受试者;低确定性证据)、心脏康复计划的依从性(标准化平均差:0.32,95% CI: 0.15至0.49;18项试验,3,024名受试者;中等确定性证据)和心脏康复完成情况(RR:1.22, 95% CI: 1.10至1.35;19项试验,受试者5432人;moderate-certainty证据)。结论:为了克服心脏康复利用率不佳的持续挑战,全球医疗保健系统应考虑采用多方面的方法来提高心脏康复利用率,将本综述中确定的患者和系统级干预策略结合起来。需要针对服务不足人群的进一步高质量试验,以优化未来心脏康复获得的公平性。
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
Heart, Lung and Circulation
Heart, Lung and Circulation CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.80%
发文量
912
审稿时长
11.9 weeks
期刊介绍: Heart, Lung and Circulation publishes articles integrating clinical and research activities in the fields of basic cardiovascular science, clinical cardiology and cardiac surgery, with a focus on emerging issues in cardiovascular disease. The journal promotes multidisciplinary dialogue between cardiologists, cardiothoracic surgeons, cardio-pulmonary physicians and cardiovascular scientists.
×
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