ReviewCardiac rehabilitation for people with heart disease: An overview of Cochrane systematic reviews☆
Introduction
Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) can be defined as “The coordinated sum of activities required to influence favourably the underlying cause of cardiovascular disease, as well as to provide the best possible physical, mental and social conditions, so that the patients may, by their own efforts, preserve or resume optimal functioning in their community and through improved health behaviour, slow or reverse progression of disease” [1].
The gold standard level of evidence to inform clinical and policy decisions on the use of new and existing therapeutic interventions is the systematic review of randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which can include a meta-analysis. The largest single producer of systematic reviews in health care is the Cochrane Collaboration, with more than 8400 published at the time of writing. Compared with systematic reviews published in paper-based journals, studies have consistently shown Cochrane systematic reviews to have greater methodological quality [2], [3], [4]. In the first two systematic reviews and meta-analyses of CR published more than 20 years ago, Oldridge and O'Connor reported a 20–25% reduction in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, pooling data from 10 and 22 RCTs respectively, comparing rehabilitation and control in over 4300 post-myocardial infarction patients [5], [6]. In 2001, Jolliffe et al. published the first Cochrane review of exercise-based CR, updating the evidence to 32 RCTs in 8440 post-myocardial infarction and revascularisation patients, and confirming a similar 27% mortality benefit of exercise-based CR [7].
With funding support of the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) in the United Kingdom, over the last 10 years the portfolio of published cardiac rehabilitation Cochrane reviews has grown to six systematic reviews/meta-analyses: Exercise-based rehabilitation for heart failure [8] ; Home‐based versus centre‐based cardiac rehabilitation [9]; Exercise‐based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease [10]; Psychological interventions for coronary heart disease [11]; Patient education in the management of coronary heart disease [12] and Promoting patient uptake and adherence in cardiac rehabilitation [13]. The development of the portfolio of Cochrane reviews has reflected many of the key areas of evolution in the provision of CR and how this model of service delivery can differ across international healthcare jurisdictions. These include the shift from emphasis on exercise training alone to comprehensive secondary prevention, including risk factor and dietary education and management of psychological factors; the broadening of the population of patients receiving CR services to include those with heart failure; the development of alternative settings of CR delivery that include home provision in addition to the traditional supervised hospital or centre-based programmes and the need to focus the outcomes of CR to inform the needs of healthcare policy makers (e.g. impacts on hospital admission, health-related quality of life (HRQL), and healthcare costs). The Cochrane CR review portfolio remains dynamic, with three reviews having undergone an update in the last 12 months [8], [9], [13].
Overviews of systematic reviews (overviews) are a new approach to summarising evidence, synthesising results from multiple systematic reviews into a single usable document [14]. By providing a single synthesis of all relevant evidence in a particular area, overviews may be useful for therapeutic and policy decision-making, providing a comprehensive “friendly front end” to the evidence, so that the reader does not have to assimilate data from separate systematic reviews. Overviews can also help inform the strategic direction of conduct and structuring of future systematic reviews. For example, the latest version of the Cochrane review of exercise-based CR for coronary heart disease (CHD) includes 47 RCTs in over 10,000 patients and may therefore benefit from being organised into sub-reviews (“splitting”) according to CHD indications, i.e. post-MI, revascularisation and angina. Finally, overviews provide an opportunity to identify potential “evidence gaps” and therefore inform areas where new Cochrane reviews should be prioritised.
This overview seeks to present a concise summary of the research question, methods and findings of the Cochrane reviews on CR. We also seek to identify the opportunities for merging or splitting across future Cochrane reviews, identify evidence gaps to inform de novo Cochrane CR review titles, and provide recommendations to encourage uniformity of future reporting systematic reviews and RCTs of CR. While it is currently recognised that ‘comprehensive’ CR programmes should contain exercise, education and psychological components, for clarity in this overview, we will pre-fix “CR” with the focus of the intervention where we feel it might help the reader in interpreting the evidence, e.g. exercise-based CR or education-based CR.
Section snippets
Methods
This overview was conducted in accordance with the recommendations for Cochrane overviews [14].
Identification of reviews
The review selection process is summarised in the flow diagram in Fig. 1. Our database search yielded 91 titles from which we identified one published Cochrane review (in addition to the previously identified six reviews) and three Cochrane review protocols which were judged to meet the inclusion criteria. On review of the full text we excluded the published Cochrane review [20] as while it evaluated physical therapy with an exercise component for elective cardiac surgery patients, only one
Summary of main results
CR programmes have become an integral part of the standard of care for patients with heart disease. The scope of contemporary CR has shifted from exercise interventions alone to more comprehensive secondary prevention programmes that include risk factor education and psychological support. This overview identified six Cochrane systematic reviews of RCTs that have assessed the outcomes of various aspects of the delivery of CR and its component interventions. The key outcome findings of our
Contributions of authors
Both authors were involved in the conception and design of the protocol and the review. LJA and RST undertook the study selection, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. The manuscript was drafted by both authors.
Declarations of interest
Lindsey Anderson declares that she has no conflicts of interest. RST was a co-author on five of the included systematic reviews.
Acknowledgements
We are grateful for the help of Nicole Martin at the Cochrane Heart Group, for her help in developing the search strategy for this overview. We are extremely grateful to our external reference group members (Dr Mike Knapton, Prof Gill Furze, Dr Neil Smart, Prof Patrick Doherty, Dr Ann-Dorthe Zwisler, Prof Neil Oldridge, Dr Phil Adams, Dr Christopher O'Conner, Dr Juan Pablo-Casas and Dr Mark Huffman) for their invaluable advice and support in the preparation of this manuscript. We thank the
References (47)
- et al.
Cochrane reviews used more rigorous methods than non-Cochrane reviews: survey of systematic reviews in physiotherapy
J Clin Epidemiol
(2009) - et al.
The reporting quality of meta-analyses improves: a random sampling study
J Clin Epidemiol
(2008) - et al.
AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews
J Clin Epidemiol
(2009) - et al.
Behavioral effects of a comprehensive, multifactorial program for lifestyle change after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: a prospective, randomized controlled study
J Psychosom Res
(1999) - et al.
Cost-effectiveness analysis of long-term moderate exercise training in chronic heart failure
Am J Cardiol
(2001) - et al.
A meta-analysis of the effect of exercise training on left ventricular remodeling in heart failure patients: the benefit depends on the type of training performed
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2007) - et al.
The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
J Clin Epidemiol
(1997) What are the components of complex interventions in healthcare? Theorizing approaches to parts, powers and the whole intervention
Soc Sci Med
(2013)- et al.
2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure. A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines
J Am Coll Cardiol
(2013) The BACPR Standards and Core Components for Cardiovascular Disease Prevention and Rehabilitation
Cochrane Skin Group systematic reviews are more methodologically rigorous than other systematic reviews in dermatology
Br J Dermatol
Cardiac rehabilitation after myocardial infarction. Combined experience of randomized clinical trials
JAMA
An overview of randomized trials of rehabilitation with exercise after myocardial infarction
Circulation
Exercise-based rehabilitation for coronary heart disease
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Exercise-based rehabilitation for heart failure
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for coronary heart disease
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Psychological interventions for coronary heart disease
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Patient education in the management of coronary heart disease
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Promoting patient uptake and adherence in cardiac rehabilitation
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Chapter 22: overviews of reviews
From systematic reviews to clinical recommendations for evidence-based health care: validation of revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews (R-AMSTAR) for grading of clinical relevance
Open Dent J
Chapter 8: assessing risk of bias in included studies
Cited by (84)
Preprocedural Anxiety in Adults With Congenital Heart Disease: The PANIC Study
2023, JACC: AdvancesKey participant characteristics influencing completion of a phase II cardiac rehabilitation program: A cross-sectional analysis
2023, American Heart Journal Plus: Cardiology Research and PracticePhysical activity and relationship to physical function, quality of life, and cognitive function in older patients with acute decompensated heart failure
2023, American Heart JournalCitation Excerpt :These extremely low levels of physical activity are concerning, given that the participants in this study had achieved clinical stability, medication optimization, and were deemed able to be discharged to independent living conditions, often living alone (30%).40 Based on the established link between low physical activity and risk of mortality and HF hospitalization in chronic stable HF,11,41,42 persistently low physical activity levels, may pose an even greater health risk to patients who have most recently experienced an ADHF event. Further, the high degree of sedentary time (91% of waking day) is itself an independent risk factor for further worsening of cardiometabolic disease morbidity,6,43-45 mortality,46,47 and disability with loss of independence.48
Frontiers and Hotspots Evolution in Psycho-cardiology: A Bibliometric Analysis From 2004 to 2022
2022, Current Problems in CardiologyCardiac Rehabilitation During Quarantine in COVID-19 Pandemic: Challenges for Center-Based Programs
2020, Archives of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationEvaluation of Cardiac Rehabilitation Performance and Initial Benchmarks for Australia: An Observational Cross-State and Territory Snapshot Study
2020, Heart Lung and CirculationCitation Excerpt :Once diagnosed with CVD, cardiac events are common, emphasising the importance of secondary prevention. The most effective, well-established method of secondary prevention intervention is cardiac rehabilitation (CR) [2–5] and referral to CR is recommended in guidelines for CVD patient care internationally [6–9]. To be effective, CR must be multi-disciplinary, multi-component, individually tailored and available equitably, therefore guidelines are provided to standardise content, delivery and access internationally [6–9].
- ☆
Funding: This study has no external funding. LJA is a University of Exeter Medical School funded Cochrane review Research Fellow.