ArticleCureus2026
Quality Improvement Study: Referral to Cardiac Rehabilitation After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.
Article in Cureus, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a key post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) quality metric and is known to improve cardiovascular outcomes. Although referral rates after PCI have been described, far less is known about what occurs after a referral order is placed, specifically whether patients are successfully contacted, whether they enroll, and the barriers they encounter. This quality improvement (QI) project aimed to determine referral and enrollment rates following PCI, compare referral timing at discharge versus the first follow-up visit, and identify patient-reported and system-level barriers contributing to low CR participation. Methods We performed a retrospective chart review of 200 consecutive patients who were at least three months post-percutaneous coronary intervention. All patients not enrolled in the CR program at our center were prospectively contacted at home to confirm if they were referred to, and whether they were doing CR. If patients were not enrolled, reasons were explored. Results A total of 194 patients were discharged. The mean age was 68±11 years, and 34% (n=65) were female. The overall referral rate was 55% (n=107), including 21.6% (n=42) at hospital discharge and 33.5% (n=65) at the first outpatient clinic visit. After at least three months post-PCI, only 35 patients (18% of the entire group and 33% of those referred) were enrolled in CR. Of those with a referral order placed at discharge, only 10 (24%) were doing CR. The most common reason for non-enrollment in cardiac rehabilitation was lack of awareness of the need to enroll, reported by 58% (n=92) of respondents. In a multivariate analysis, PCI in an urgent setting and prior PCI were the only independent predictors of non-referral. Not private insurance and diabetes were independent predictors of lack of CR participation. Conclusions Referral to, and especially enrollment in, the CR programs post-PCI remained markedly low. Enrollment tended to be lower when referrals were placed at discharge, highlighting limitations of current quality metrics that focus solely on referral placement. Improving patient and physician education and strengthening system-level processes may help support higher enrollment and more effective use of CR.
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.