TY - JOUR
T1 - Dose of cardiac rehabilitation to reduce mortality and morbidity
T2 - A population-based study
AU - Medina-Inojosa, Jose R.
AU - Grace, Sherry L.
AU - Supervia, Marta
AU - Stokin, Gorazd
AU - Bonikowske, Amanda R.
AU - Thomas, Randal
AU - Lopez-Jimenez, Francisco
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported in part by the European Regional Development Fund-FNUSA-ICRC (No. Z.1.05/1.1.00/02.0123) by project no. LQ1605 from the National Program of Sustainability II (MEYS CR), by the project ICRC-ERA-Human Bridge (No. 316345) funded by the 7th Framework Programme of the European Union. This publication was also made possible in part by CTSA Grant Number UL1TR000135, resources of the Rochester Epidemiology Project (REP) medical records-linkage system, which is supported by the National Institute on Aging (NIA; AG 058738), by the Mayo Clinic Research Committee, and by fees paid annually by REP users. However, the content of this article is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not represent the official views of the funding sources.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley.
PY - 2021/10/19
Y1 - 2021/10/19
N2 - BACKGROUND: There is wide variability in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) dose (ie, number of sessions) delivered, and no evidence-based recommendations regarding what dose to prescribe. We aimed to test what CR dose impacts major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). METHODS AND RESULTS: This is an historical cohort study of all patients who had coronary artery disease and who initiated su-pervised CR between 2002 and 2012 from a single major CR center. CR dose was defined as number of visits including exercise and patient education. Follow-up was performed using record linkage from the Rochester Epidemiology Project. MACEs included acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ventricular arrhythmias, stroke, revascularization, or all-cause mortality. Dose was analyzed in several ways, including tertiles, categories, and as a continuous variable. Cox models were adjusted for factors associated with dose and MACE. The cohort consisted of 2345 patients, who attended a mean of 12.5±11.1 of 36 prescribed sessions. After a mean follow-up of 6 years, 695 (29.65%) patients had a MACE, including 231 who died. CR dose was inversely associated with MACE (hazard ratio, 0.66 [95% CI]; 0.55– 0.91) in those completing ≥20 sessions, when compared with those not exposed to formal exercise sessions (≤1 session; log-rank P=0.007). We did not find evidence of nonlinearity (P≥0.050), suggesting no minimal threshold nor ceiling. Each additional session was associated with a lower rate of MACE (fully adjusted hazard ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.97– 0.99]). Greater session frequency was also associated with lower MACE risk (fully adjusted hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.58– 0.94]). CONCLUSIONS: CR reduces MACEs, but the benefit appears to be linear, with greater risk reduction with higher doses, and no upper threshold.
AB - BACKGROUND: There is wide variability in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) dose (ie, number of sessions) delivered, and no evidence-based recommendations regarding what dose to prescribe. We aimed to test what CR dose impacts major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs). METHODS AND RESULTS: This is an historical cohort study of all patients who had coronary artery disease and who initiated su-pervised CR between 2002 and 2012 from a single major CR center. CR dose was defined as number of visits including exercise and patient education. Follow-up was performed using record linkage from the Rochester Epidemiology Project. MACEs included acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina, ventricular arrhythmias, stroke, revascularization, or all-cause mortality. Dose was analyzed in several ways, including tertiles, categories, and as a continuous variable. Cox models were adjusted for factors associated with dose and MACE. The cohort consisted of 2345 patients, who attended a mean of 12.5±11.1 of 36 prescribed sessions. After a mean follow-up of 6 years, 695 (29.65%) patients had a MACE, including 231 who died. CR dose was inversely associated with MACE (hazard ratio, 0.66 [95% CI]; 0.55– 0.91) in those completing ≥20 sessions, when compared with those not exposed to formal exercise sessions (≤1 session; log-rank P=0.007). We did not find evidence of nonlinearity (P≥0.050), suggesting no minimal threshold nor ceiling. Each additional session was associated with a lower rate of MACE (fully adjusted hazard ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.97– 0.99]). Greater session frequency was also associated with lower MACE risk (fully adjusted hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.58– 0.94]). CONCLUSIONS: CR reduces MACEs, but the benefit appears to be linear, with greater risk reduction with higher doses, and no upper threshold.
KW - Cardiac rehabilitation
KW - Major adverse cardiovascular events
KW - Mortality
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85119303726&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85119303726&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1161/JAHA.120.021356
DO - 10.1161/JAHA.120.021356
M3 - Article
C2 - 34612055
AN - SCOPUS:85119303726
SN - 2047-9980
VL - 10
JO - Journal of the American Heart Association
JF - Journal of the American Heart Association
IS - 20
M1 - e021356
ER -