Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27760269›Full record

ArticleJAMA cardiology2016

Association Between Cardiac Rehabilitation Participation and Health Status Outcomes After Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Faraz Kureshi, Kevin F Kennedy, Philip G Jones, Randal J Thomas, Suzanne V Arnold, Praneet Sharma, Timothy Fendler, Donna M Buchanan, Mohammed Qintar, P Michael Ho and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA cardiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Faraz KureshiDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases and Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri2School of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Kevin F KennedyDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases and Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri.
Philip G JonesDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases and Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri.
Randal J ThomasDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Suzanne V ArnoldDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases and Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri2School of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Praneet SharmaDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases and Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri2School of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Timothy FendlerDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases and Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri2School of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Donna M BuchananDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases and Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri2School of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City.
Mohammed QintarDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases and Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri2School of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City.
P Michael HoDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases, University of Colorado-Denver.
Brahmajee K NallamothuDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor.
Neil B OldridgeUniversity of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Milwaukee7Aurora Cardiovascular Services, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
John A SpertusDivision of Cardiovascular Diseases and Cardiovascular Outcomes Research, Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri2School of Medicine, University of Missouri-Kansas City.

Funding

SCCOR in Cardiac Dysfunction and DiseaseP50HL077113 · NHLBI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI KELLY, DANIEL PATRICK · 2005 to 2009
$13.4M
CARDIOVASCULAR OUTCOMES RESEARCH TRAINING PROGRAMT32HL110837 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI KANSAS CITY · PI JOHN A SPERTUS · 2012 to 2026
$5.0M
NHLBI NIH HHS P50 HL077113NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL110837
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceCardiac rehabilitation (CR) improves survival after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and referral to CR has been introduced as a performance measure of high-quality care. The association of participation in CR with patients' health status (eg, quality of life, symptoms, and functional status) is poorly defined.

objectiveTo examine the association of participation in CR with health status outcomes after AMI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsA retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients enrolled in 2 AMI registries: PREMIER, from January 1, 2003, to June 28, 2004, and TRIUMPH, from April 11, 2005, to December 31, 2008. The analytic cohort was restricted to 4929 patients with data available on baseline health status, 6- or 12- month follow-up health status, and participation in CR. Data analysis was performed from 2014 to 2015. EXPOSURES: Participation in at least 1 CR session within 6 months of hospital discharge. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Patient health status was quantified using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) and the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12). The primary outcomes of interest were the mean differences in SAQ domain scores during the 12 months after AMI between patients who did and did not participate in CR. Secondary outcomes were the mean differences in the SF-12 summary scores and all-cause mortality.

resultsAfter successfully matching the cohorts of the 4929 patients (3328 men and 1601 women; mean [SD] age, 60.0 [12.2] years) for the propensity to participate in CR and comparing the groups using linear, mixed-effects models, mean differences in the SAQ and SF-12 domain scores were similar at 6 and 12 months between the 2012 patients participating in CR (3 were unable to be matched) and the 2894 who did not participate (20 were unable to be matched). At 6 months, the mean difference was -0.76 (95% CI, -2.05 to 0.52) for the SAQ quality of life score, -1.53 (95% CI, -2.57 to -0.49) for the SAQ angina frequency score, 0.38 (95% CI, -0.51 to 1.27) for the SAQ treatment satisfaction score, -0.42 (95% CI, -1.65 to 0.79) for the SAQ physical limitation score, 0.50 (95% CI, -0.22 to 1.22) for the SF-12 physical component score, and 0.13 (95% CI, -0.53 to 0.79) for the SF-12 mental component score. At 12 months, the mean difference was -0.89 (95% CI, -2.20 to 0.43) for the SAQ quality of life score, -1.05 (95% CI, -2.12 to 0.02) for the SAQ angina frequency score, 0.38 (95% CI, -0.54 to 1.29) for the SAQ treatment satisfaction score, -0.14 (95% CI, -1.41 to 1.14) for the SAQ physical limitation score, 0.17 (95% CI, -0.57 to 0.92) for the SF-12 physical component score, and 0.12 (95% CI, -0.56 to 0.80) for the SF-12 mental component score. In contrast, the hazard rate of all-cause mortality (up to 7 years) associated with participating in CR was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46-0.75). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a cohort of 4929 patients with AMI, we found that those who did and did not participate in CR had similar reported health status during the year following AMI; however, participation in CR did confer a significant survival benefit. These findings underscore the need for increased use of validated patient-reported outcome measures to further examine if and how health status can be maximized for patients who participate in CR.

Identifiers

PMID27760269
PMCPMC5482268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.