Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up
N/A N=1,154 Prevention

The Healthy Heart Study

Cardiac Rehabilitation

Enrolled (actual)
1,154
Serious AEs
0.0%
Results posted
Apr 2019
Primary outcome: Primary: Participation in Cardiac Rehabilitation — 231; 252 Participants — p=0.80

Study Design & Population

Study type
Interventional
Phase
N/A
Interventions
Referral to home-based cardiac rehab (Behavioral); Referral to center-based cardiac rehab (Behavioral)
Age
Adult, Older Adult · 18+ yrs
Sex
All
Sponsor
University of California, San Francisco
Primary completion
Mar 2018

Outcome Measures

OutcomeResultp-value
PRIMARY
Participation in Cardiac Rehabilitation
231; 252 0.80

Summary

The long-term goal of this research is to improve patient-centered outcomes in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD), the leading cause of death in the world. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs decrease mortality and improve quality of life in patients with CHD. Published guidelines recommend exercise-based CR following hospitalization for myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass grafting, or percutaneous coronary revascularization. Despite these compelling benefits, CR programs are vastly underutilized, with less than a third of eligible patients participating. One promising solution is greater implementation of home-based CR. Both home and center-based CR programs have equal benefits on cardiovascular risk factors and quality of life. However, similar efficacy does not necessarily translate into similar effectiveness. If patients are more likely to participate in home- vs. center-based therapy, then greater participation could lead to greater clinical effectiveness. We are therefore conducting a quasi-experimental, controlled trial at two VA medical centers to determine the comparative effectiveness of referral to home- vs. center-based CR in patients with CHD. Aim 1: Determine whether automatic referral to home- vs. center-based CR increases patient participation in CR after hospitalization for myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization. Aim 2: Among patients who choose to participate in CR, compare the effectiveness of home- vs. center-based CR on six-minute walk distance, quality of life, and healthcare expenditures. Aim 3: Determine whether the effects of home vs. center-based CR differ by age, gender, race, ethnicity, employment, socioeconomic status, social support, comorbid conditions, or patient preference. Results from this study will (a) help policy makers determine the effect of covering home CR on healthcare expenditures in patients with CHD; (b) help providers understand the potential benefits and harms of home- vs. center-based CR; and (c) help patients answer questions like, "Given my personal circumstances and preferences, which of these options will improve the outcomes most important to me".

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

Post MI, CABG, or PCI Able to speak, read and write in english

Exclusion Criteria

Class IV CHF Unstable Angina Complex Ventricular Arrythmias EF 200mmHG Resting DBP>110mmHG Cognitive Impairment by MoCA Score <26 Life expectancy <1 year

View full record on ClinicalTrials.gov →

Data sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02105246). Outcome figures and adverse-event rates are extracted automatically from the registry's posted results and are provided for clinician reference, not as a substitute for the primary publication.

Back to search