ArticleVascular health and risk management2011
Current state of cardiac rehabilitation in Germany: patient characteristics, risk factor management and control status, by education level.
Article in Vascular health and risk management, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Four weeks of electromyostimulation improves muscle function and strength in sarcopenic patients: a three-arm parallel randomized trial.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2021Trial
- Reduction of coronary risk factors immediately and 1 year after inpatient rehabilitation in a highly motivated patient cohort.Wiener medizinische Wochenschrift (1946) · 2015Trial
- Barriers and Facilitators to Delivering Inpatient Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2023Article
- Do acute coronary events affect lipid management and cholesterol goal attainment in Germany? : Results from the Dyslipidemia International study II.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2018 · on this mapObservational
- Rehabilitation training improves exercise tolerance after percutaneous coronary intervention.Journal of biomedical research · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAfter the acute hospital stay, most cardiac patients in Germany are transferred for a 3-4-week period of inpatient cardiac rehabilitation. We aim to describe patient characteristics and risk factor management of cardiac rehabilitation patients with a focus on drug treatment and control status, differentiated by education level (low level, elementary school; intermediate level, secondary modern school; high level, grammar school/university).
methodsData covering a time period between 2003 and 2008 from 68,191 hospitalized patients in cardiac rehabilitation from a large-scale registry (Transparency Registry to Objectify Guideline- Oriented Risk Factor Management) were analyzed descriptively. Further, a multivariate model was applied to assess factors associated with good control of risk factors.
resultsIn the total cohort, patients with a manifestation of coronary artery disease (mean age 63.7 years, males 71.7%) were referred to cardiac rehabilitation after having received percutaneous coronary intervention (51.6%) or coronary bypass surgery (39.5%). Statin therapy increased from 76.3% at entry to 88.9% at discharge, and low density lipoprotein cholesterol < 100 mg/dL rates increased from 31.1% to 69.6%. Mean fasting blood glucose decreased from 108 mg/dL to 104 mg/dL, and mean exercise capacity increased from 78 W to 95 W. Age and gender did not differ by education. In contrast with patients having high education, those with low education had more diabetes, hypertension, and peripheral arterial disease, had lower exercise capacity, and received less treatment with statins and guideline-orientated therapy in general. In the multivariate model, good control was significantly more likely in men (odds ratio 1.38; 95% confidence interval 1.30-1.46), less likely in patients of higher age (0.99; 0.99-0.99), with diabetes (0.90; 0.85-0.95), or peripheral arterial disease (0.88; 0.82-0.95). Compared with a low level education, a mid level education was associated with poor control (0.94; 0.89-0.99), while high education did not have a significant effect (1.08; 0.99-1.17).
conclusionPatients with different levels of education treated in cardiac rehabilitation did not differ relevantly in terms of demographics, but did differ in some clinical aspects. With respect to the ultimate goal of cardiac rehabilitation, ie, optimal control of risk factors, education level does not play an important role.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.