自我选择中心心脏康复与混合心脏远程康复患者特征和健康结果的比较:一项前瞻性队列研究

IF 8.4 2区 医学 Q1 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS
Prisca Eser, Matteo Pini, Thomas Vetsch, Thimo Marcin, Seraina Berni, Regula Burri, Flurina Casanova, Sarina Huber, Franziska Gurschler, Claudia Boeni, Michael Hubli, Nico Herwegh, Andreas Zimmermann, Laura Hess, Sven Schmutz, Matthias Wilhelm
{"title":"自我选择中心心脏康复与混合心脏远程康复患者特征和健康结果的比较:一项前瞻性队列研究","authors":"Prisca Eser, Matteo Pini, Thomas Vetsch, Thimo Marcin, Seraina Berni, Regula Burri, Flurina Casanova, Sarina Huber, Franziska Gurschler, Claudia Boeni, Michael Hubli, Nico Herwegh, Andreas Zimmermann, Laura Hess, Sven Schmutz, Matthias Wilhelm","doi":"10.1093/eurjpc/zwaf107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Data on self-selected modes of delivery of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) are limited. This study compared centre-based CR (cbCR) with hybrid cardiac telerehabilitation (hCTR) in terms of patient characteristics, change in physical and mental functioning, and achievement of guideline-directed treatment targets.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>From May 2022 to December 2023, consecutive patients with cardiovascular diseases were enrolled at a tertiary centre into a 3 month cbCR or hCTR programme based on shared decision-making. Changes in exercise capacity, anxiety, depression, and health-related quality of life (hrQoL) scores from admission to the discharge visit were compared between CR modalities. The achievement of two-step blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) goals, as well as the HbA1c goal in patients with diabetes at the discharge visit, was compared between CR modalities. Out of 1292 patients screened, 406 (21% females, age 60.4 ± 12.7 years) were eligible and completed the study. Of those, 72% chose cbCR and 28% chose hCTR. Patients in hCTR were 3 years younger and exhibited higher baseline peak VO2 (91 vs. 80% of predicted), better hrQoL, and lower depression and anxiety scores. No significant differences were found in improvements in physical or mental functioning or in meeting blood pressure and HbA1c targets between the two groups. A smaller proportion of hCTR participants achieved the LDL-C Step I target (56 vs. 69% in cbCR).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, hCTR attracted slightly younger patients with better baseline health, but both modalities showed similar effects on most health outcomes. Centre-based cardiac rehabilitation was associated with tighter lipid control, which could be related to more intense counselling or patient preference.</p>","PeriodicalId":12051,"journal":{"name":"European journal of preventive cardiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of patient characteristics and health outcomes between self-selected centre-based cardiac rehabilitation and hybrid cardiac telerehabilitation: a prospective cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Prisca Eser, Matteo Pini, Thomas Vetsch, Thimo Marcin, Seraina Berni, Regula Burri, Flurina Casanova, Sarina Huber, Franziska Gurschler, Claudia Boeni, Michael Hubli, Nico Herwegh, Andreas Zimmermann, Laura Hess, Sven Schmutz, Matthias Wilhelm\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/eurjpc/zwaf107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Data on self-selected modes of delivery of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) are limited. This study compared centre-based CR (cbCR) with hybrid cardiac telerehabilitation (hCTR) in terms of patient characteristics, change in physical and mental functioning, and achievement of guideline-directed treatment targets.</p><p><strong>Methods and results: </strong>From May 2022 to December 2023, consecutive patients with cardiovascular diseases were enrolled at a tertiary centre into a 3 month cbCR or hCTR programme based on shared decision-making. Changes in exercise capacity, anxiety, depression, and health-related quality of life (hrQoL) scores from admission to the discharge visit were compared between CR modalities. The achievement of two-step blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) goals, as well as the HbA1c goal in patients with diabetes at the discharge visit, was compared between CR modalities. Out of 1292 patients screened, 406 (21% females, age 60.4 ± 12.7 years) were eligible and completed the study. Of those, 72% chose cbCR and 28% chose hCTR. Patients in hCTR were 3 years younger and exhibited higher baseline peak VO2 (91 vs. 80% of predicted), better hrQoL, and lower depression and anxiety scores. No significant differences were found in improvements in physical or mental functioning or in meeting blood pressure and HbA1c targets between the two groups. A smaller proportion of hCTR participants achieved the LDL-C Step I target (56 vs. 69% in cbCR).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Overall, hCTR attracted slightly younger patients with better baseline health, but both modalities showed similar effects on most health outcomes. Centre-based cardiac rehabilitation was associated with tighter lipid control, which could be related to more intense counselling or patient preference.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12051,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of preventive cardiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of preventive cardiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwaf107\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of preventive cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwaf107","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:自我选择的心脏康复(CR)递送方式的数据有限。本研究比较了以中心为基础的CR (cbCR)和混合型心脏远程康复(hCTR)在患者特征、身心功能改变和指导治疗目标实现方面的差异。方法和结果:从2022年5月至2023年12月,连续的心血管疾病患者被纳入三级中心,参与基于共同决策的为期3个月的cbCR或hCTR计划。比较两种CR模式从入院到出院期间运动能力、焦虑、抑郁和健康相关生活质量(hrQoL)评分的变化。比较两种CR方式对糖尿病患者出院时两步血压和ldl -胆固醇(LDL-C)目标以及HbA1c目标的实现情况。在筛选的1292例患者中,406例(21%为女性,年龄60.4±12.7岁)符合条件并完成了研究。其中,72%选择cbCR, 28%选择hCTR。hCTR组患者年轻3岁,表现出更高的基线峰值VO2(91%对80%的预测),更好的hrQoL,更低的抑郁和焦虑评分。两组患者在身体或精神功能改善、血压和糖化血红蛋白达标方面均无显著差异。较小比例的hCTR参与者达到了LDL-C第一步目标(56%对69%的cbCR)。结论:总体而言,hCTR吸引了基线健康状况较好的年轻患者,但两种模式对大多数健康结果的影响相似。以中心为基础的心脏康复与更严格的脂质控制有关,这可能与更强烈的咨询或患者偏好有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of patient characteristics and health outcomes between self-selected centre-based cardiac rehabilitation and hybrid cardiac telerehabilitation: a prospective cohort study.

Aims: Data on self-selected modes of delivery of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) are limited. This study compared centre-based CR (cbCR) with hybrid cardiac telerehabilitation (hCTR) in terms of patient characteristics, change in physical and mental functioning, and achievement of guideline-directed treatment targets.

Methods and results: From May 2022 to December 2023, consecutive patients with cardiovascular diseases were enrolled at a tertiary centre into a 3 month cbCR or hCTR programme based on shared decision-making. Changes in exercise capacity, anxiety, depression, and health-related quality of life (hrQoL) scores from admission to the discharge visit were compared between CR modalities. The achievement of two-step blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol (LDL-C) goals, as well as the HbA1c goal in patients with diabetes at the discharge visit, was compared between CR modalities. Out of 1292 patients screened, 406 (21% females, age 60.4 ± 12.7 years) were eligible and completed the study. Of those, 72% chose cbCR and 28% chose hCTR. Patients in hCTR were 3 years younger and exhibited higher baseline peak VO2 (91 vs. 80% of predicted), better hrQoL, and lower depression and anxiety scores. No significant differences were found in improvements in physical or mental functioning or in meeting blood pressure and HbA1c targets between the two groups. A smaller proportion of hCTR participants achieved the LDL-C Step I target (56 vs. 69% in cbCR).

Conclusion: Overall, hCTR attracted slightly younger patients with better baseline health, but both modalities showed similar effects on most health outcomes. Centre-based cardiac rehabilitation was associated with tighter lipid control, which could be related to more intense counselling or patient preference.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European journal of preventive cardiology
European journal of preventive cardiology CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS-
CiteScore
12.50
自引率
12.00%
发文量
601
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: European Journal of Preventive Cardiology (EJPC) is an official journal of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC). The journal covers a wide range of scientific, clinical, and public health disciplines related to cardiovascular disease prevention, risk factor management, cardiovascular rehabilitation, population science and public health, and exercise physiology. The categories covered by the journal include classical risk factors and treatment, lifestyle risk factors, non-modifiable cardiovascular risk factors, cardiovascular conditions, concomitant pathological conditions, sport cardiology, diagnostic tests, care settings, epidemiology, pharmacology and pharmacotherapy, machine learning, and artificial intelligence.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信