ArticleJournal of the Royal College of Physicians of London
Outpatient cardiac rehabilitation: are the potential benefits being realised?
Article in Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of London. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Plasma haemostatic markers, endothelial function and ambulatory blood pressure changes with home versus hospital cardiac rehabilitation: the Birmingham Rehabilitation Uptake Maximisation Study.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2006Trial
- Home-based versus hospital-based cardiac rehabilitation after myocardial infarction or revascularisation: design and rationale of the Birmingham Rehabilitation Uptake Maximisation Study (BRUM): a randomised controlled trial [ISRCTN72884263].BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2003Trial
- The current cost of angina pectoris to the National Health Service in the UK.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2003Article
- The economic burden of coronary heart disease in the UK.Heart (British Cardiac Society) · 2002Article
- Exercise in cardiac rehabilitation.British journal of sports medicine · 1999Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveto give a comprehensive description of the practice of outpatient cardiac rehabilitation in Scotland.
designan identifying survey of 1,270 individuals in hospital, general practice and community sources nationally, followed by computer-assisted telephone interviews about programme characteristics with key personnel from identified cardiac rehabilitation schemes. OUTCOME MEASURES: patient provision, referral criteria and programme features.
results65 programmes provided outpatient cardiac rehabilitation for 4,980 patients in one year, representing 17% of the 29,180 patients who survived admission to hospital with coronary heart disease. Cardiac rehabilitation practice varied widely: 53 (82%) programmes included exercise, although only 19 (29%) at the most beneficial level; 40 (62%) included relaxation training, although only three (5%) at a level shown to give benefit; 47 (72%) included education, although only 16 (25%) in a manner with reported benefits in randomised trials.
conclusionsoutpatient cardiac rehabilitation was provided to a minority of patients with coronary heart disease. Programmes varied widely, and were often more limited than those reporting mortality and morbidity benefits in randomised trials. There is a substantial gap between current provision and practice of cardiac rehabilitation and that advocated in published guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
8961204PMC5401477W2409612592What 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.