ArticleHealthcare (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Differences in 6-Minute Walk Distance Across Heart Disease Recurrence Risk Levels in Cardiac Rehab Patients.
Article in Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesCardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs are multi-component interventions comprising structured strength and cardiovascular exercise training, psychological support, education, and therapies to promote positive lifestyle changes. This study aimed to determine if there are differences in the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) across risk groups for recurrent heart disease.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study used existing data collected from electronic medical records. The 6-minute walk distance was measured at baseline (pre-6MWD) and upon the completion of the CR program (post-6MWD). Short-term cardiac event recurrence risk was determined using a two-year recurrent coronary heart disease (2yRCHD) risk percentage, calculated according to the Framingham 2yRCHD calculator. Risk was then stratified into (1) low, (2) moderate, and (3) high-risk groups. Demographic variables (e.g., age, sex, racial/ethnic group) and clinical variables (e.g., BMI, lipid panels, fasting glucose levels, comorbidities) were collected to describe the study participants and identify potential confounders. An ANOVA and ANCOVA were performed to examine the differences in 6MWD across the 2yRCHD risk groups.
resultsA total of 394 CR participants' data were included in this analysis. Ninety-nine percent of the female participants were classified as low risk for recurrent heart disease, resulting in an extremely small sample size in the moderate-risk (n = 1) and no representation (n = 0) in the high-risk group. This lack of representation made it impossible to conduct comparative analyses across all the participants or to analyze female participants separately by risk category. Consequently, only male participant data were included in the final analysis. The study showed that pre- and post-6MWD measurements were significantly different across the three 2yRCHD risk groups (
conclusionsThe observed differences in the 6MWD across short-term cardiac recurrence risk levels suggest its potential as a simple, accessible tool for assessing cardiac recurrence risk levels in community settings. Further research is needed to generalize these findings to more diverse populations and to support aging in place for older adults living with heart disease.
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.