Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30857429›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of preventive cardiology2019

Additional effects of psychological interventions on subjective and objective outcomes compared with exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation alone in patients with cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Christian Albus, Christoph Herrmann-Lingen, Katrin Jensen, Matthes Hackbusch, Nina Münch, Catharina Kuncewicz, Maurizio Grilli, Bernhard Schwaab, Bernhard Rauch, German Society of Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (DGPR)

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of preventive cardiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. The importance, consequences and treatment of psychosocial risk factors in heart disease: less conversation, more action!Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2024
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Christian Albus1 Department of Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, University of Cologne, Germany.
Christoph Herrmann-Lingen2 Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Göttingen Medical Centre, Germany.
Katrin Jensen4 Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Germany.
Matthes Hackbusch4 Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Germany.
Nina Münch1 Department of Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, University of Cologne, Germany.
Catharina Kuncewicz2 Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Göttingen Medical Centre, Germany.
Maurizio Grilli5 Library of the Medical Faculty, University of Mannheim, Germany.
Bernhard Schwaab6 Curschmann Klinik, Timmendorfer Strand, Germany.
Bernhard Rauch7 IHF-Institut für Herzinfarktforschung, Ludwigshafen am Rhein, Germany.
German Society of Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (DGPR)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundExercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (ebCR) often includes various psychological interventions for lifestyle change or distress management. However, the additional benefit of specific psychological interventions on depression, anxiety, quality of life, cardiac morbidity and cardiovascular or total mortality is not well investigated.

designSystematic review and meta-analysis.

methodsRandomized controlled trials and controlled cohort trials published between January 1995 and October 2017 comparing ebCR with or without pre-specified psychosocial interventions were selected and evaluated on the basis of predefined inclusion and outcome criteria.

resultsOut of 15,373 records, 20 studies were identified, including 4450 patients with coronary artery disease (88.5%) or congestive heart failure (11.5%), respectively. Studies were of low to moderate quality and methodological heterogeneity was high. As compared with ebCR alone, additional psychological interventions for lifestyle change or distress management showed a trend to reduce depressive symptoms (standardized mean difference -0.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.30; 0.05). Furthermore, during a follow-up of five years, distress management was associated with a trend to reduce cardiac morbidity (risk ratio 0.74, 95% CI 0.51; 1.07). There was no evidence for an additional impact of either psychological lifestyle change interventions or distress management on anxiety, quality of life, cardiovascular or total mortality.

conclusionsSpecific psychological interventions offered during ebCR may contribute to a reduction of depressive symptoms and cardiac morbidity, but there remains considerable uncertainty under which conditions these interventions exert their optimal effects. (CRD42015025920).

Indexed as

Exercise TherapyRisk Reduction BehaviorAdultAnxietyCardiac RehabilitationCardiovascular DiseasesDepressionFemaleHealth StatusHumansMaleMental HealthMiddle AgedQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRisk FactorsanxietyCardiacdepressionmorbiditymortalitypsychological interventionsquality of liferehabilitationsecondary preventionsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30857429
PMCPMC6604240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.