ArticleJournal of rehabilitation medicine2014
The impact of patient-healthcare provider discussions on enrollment in cardiovascular rehabilitation.
Article in Journal of rehabilitation medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions to promote patient utilisation of cardiac rehabilitation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Current Role and Future Perspectives of Cardiac Rehabilitation in Heart Disease.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2024Review
- Cardiac Rehabilitation: Under-Utilized Globally.Current cardiology reports · 2021Review
- Implementing recommendations for inpatient healthcare provider encouragement of cardiac rehabilitation participation: development and evaluation of an online course.BMC health services research · 2020Article
- Barriers physicians face when referring patients to cardiac rehabilitation: a narrative review.Annals of translational medicine · 2019Review
- Interventions to Promote Patient Utilization of Cardiac Rehabilitation: Cochrane Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveSecondary prevention programs such as cardiovascular rehabilitation significantly decrease the burden of cardiovascular disease, yet are under-used. The most successful strategy to promote cardiovascular rehabilitation utilization is systematic referral with a patient-provider discussion. This study investigated: (i) the elements of patient-provider discussions related to patient cardiovascular rehabilitation enrollment, and (ii) the frequency and correlates of these discussion elements. DESIGN/
participantsThis was a prospective study of cardiovascular patients and their healthcare providers. Discussions about "secondary prevention" were audio-recorded. Utterances were coded using the Roter Interaction Analysis System. Two months later, cardiovascular rehabilitation enrollment was ascertained.
resultsDiscussions between 26 healthcare providers and 50 patients were recorded, of whom 27 (54.0%) enrolled in cardiovascular rehabilitation. Participants were significantly more likely to enroll in cardiovascular rehabilitation when their healthcare providers offered less reassurance and optimism (odds ratio (OR) = 0.81), and when the patient asked more questions related to lifestyle (OR = 4.98). These were not common.
conclusionWhile caution is warranted due to the number of comparisons undertaken such that associations observed may be chance associations, these novel findings suggest that not overstating the beneficial effects of acute treatment, and allowing patients more time to ask questions about needed lifestyle changes should be investigated in future research.
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.