Inclusion of People With Peripheral Artery Disease in Cardiac Rehabilitation Programs: A Pan-Canadian Survey

Barriers and Facilitators to Cardiovascular Rehabilitation Programmes for People with Lower Limb Amputation: A Survey of Clinical Practice in Canada

Purpose

This study determines barriers and facilitators to including people with lower limb amputation (LLA) in cardiovascular rehabilitation programmes (CRPs).

Method

Canadian CRP managers and exercise therapists were invited to complete a questionnaire.

Results

There were 87 respondents. Of the 32 CRP managers, 65.6% reported that people with LLA were eligible for referral, but of these, 61.9% only accepted people with LLA and cardiac disease, and 38.1% only accepted them with ≥ 1 cardiovascular risk factor. CRP eligibility progressively decreased as mobility severity increased, with 94% of programmes accepting those with mild mobility deficits but only 48% accepting those with severe deficits. Among therapists in CRPs that accepted LLAs, 54.3% reported not having an LLA participant within the past three years. Among all responding therapists and managers who were also therapists (n = 58), 43% lacked confidence in managing safety concerns, and 45%, 16%, and 7% lacked confidence in prescribing aerobic exercise to LLA with severe, moderate, and no mobility deficits respectively. There was a similar finding with prescribing resistance training. LLA-specific education had not been provided to any respondent within the past three years. The top barriers were lack of referrals (52.6%; 30) and lack of knowledge of the contraindications to exercise specific for LLA (43.1%; 31). Facilitators included the provision of a resistance-training tool kit (63.4%; 45), education on exercise safety (63.4%; 45), and indications for physician intervention/inspection (63.6%; 42).

Conclusion

Most of the CRPs surveyed only accept people with LLA if they have co-existing cardiac disease or cardiovascular risk factors. Few people with LLA participate. Education on CRP delivery for LLAs is needed to improve therapists' confidence and exercise safety.

Pre-participation Withdrawal and Noncompletion of Cardiac Rehabilitation in Peripheral Artery Disease: MATCHED COMPARISONS TO CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE

PURPOSE

Despite the mortality benefit of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) participation, as well as its cost-effectiveness for people with peripheral artery disease (PAD), there are limited data on adherence and completion of CR in those with and without concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD). The objective of this study was to compare CR pre-participation withdrawal and noncompletion between patients with PAD and concomitant PAD and CAD (PAD/CAD) versus matched and unmatched patients with CAD (uCAD).

METHODS

Consecutively referred patients between 2006-2017 with PAD (n = 271) and PAD/CAD (n = 610) were matched to CAD by age, sex, diabetes, smoking status, and referral year. The uCAD (n = 14 487) group was included for comparison. Reasons for withdrawal were ascertained by interview.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in pre-participation withdrawal between PAD and matched CAD (46 vs 43%, P = .49), nor in noncompletion (22 vs 18%, P = .28). Results were similar for PAD/CAD and matched CAD (withdrawal: 36 vs 34%, P = .37) and (noncompletion: 25 vs 23%, P = .46). A smaller proportion of patients with uCAD withdrew (28%) than patients with PAD ( P < .001) and PAD/CAD ( P < .001), with no difference in noncompletion ( P > .40, both). There were no differences between PAD and PAD/CAD and their matched counterparts for medical and nonmedical reasons for withdrawal and noncompletion ( P ≥ .25, all).

CONCLUSION

Pre-participation withdrawal rates were similar between patients with PAD, PAD/CAD, and their matched cohorts but greater than patients with uCAD. Once patients started CR, there were similar completion rates among all groups. Reports that patients with PAD are less likely to start CR may be related to their complex medical profile rather than PAD alone. Strategies to improve participation among patients with PAD should focus on the immediate post-referral period.

Clinical Determinants and Barriers to Cardiac Rehabilitation Enrollment of Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Single-Center Study in Portugal

Despite cardiac rehabilitation (CR) being a recommended treatment for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), it is still underused. This study investigated the clinical determinants and barriers to enrollment in a CR program for HFrEF patients. We conducted a cohort study using the Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale (CRBS) to assess the reason for non-enrollment. Of 214 HFrEF patients, 65% had not been enrolled in CR. Patients not enrolled in CR programs were older (63 vs. 58 years; p < 0.01) and were more likely to have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (20% vs. 5%; p < 0.01). Patients enrolled in CR were more likely to be treated with sacubitril/valsartan (34% vs. 19%; p = 0.01), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (84% vs. 72%; p = 0.04), an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) (41% vs. 20%; p < 0.01), and cardiac resynchronization therapy (21% vs. 10%; p = 0.03). Multivariate analysis revealed that age (adjusted OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01−1.07), higher education level (adjusted OR 3.31; 95% CI 1.63−6.70), stroke (adjusted OR 3.29; 95% CI 1.06−10.27), COPD (adjusted OR 4.82; 95% CI 1.53−15.16), and no ICD status (adjusted OR 2.68; 95% CI 1.36−5.26) were independently associated with CR non-enrollment. The main reasons for not being enrolled in CR were no medical referral (31%), concomitant medical problems (28%), patient refusal (11%), and geographical distance to the hospital (9%). Despite the relatively high proportion (35%) of HFrEF patients who underwent CR, the enrollment rate can be further improved. Innovative multi-level strategies addressing physicians’ awareness, patients’ comorbidities, and geographical issues should be pursued.

Post pandemic research priorities: A consensus statement from the HL-PIVOT

We have been amid unhealthy living and related chronic disease pandemics for several decades. These longstanding crises have troublingly synergized with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The need to establish research priorities in response to COVID-19 can be used to address broad health and wellbeing, social and economic impacts for the future is emerging. Accordingly, this paper sets out a series of research priorities that could inform interdisciplinary collaboration between clinical sciences, public health, business, technology, economics, healthcare providers, and the exercise science/sports medicine communities, among others. A five-step methodology was used to generate and evaluate the research priorities with a focus on broad health and well-being impacts. The methodology was deployed by an international and interdisciplinary team from the Healthy Living for Pandemic Event Protection (HL- PIVOT) network. This team were all engaged in responding to the Pandemic either on the 'front-line' and/or in leadership positions ensuring the currency and authenticity of the process. Eight research priorities were identified clustered into two groups: i) Societal & Environmental, and ii) Clinical. Our eight research priorities are presented with insight from previously published research priorities from other groups.

Reference Standards for Cardiorespiratory Fitness by Cardiovascular Disease Category and Testing Modality: Data From FRIEND

Background

The importance of cardiorespiratory fitness for stratifying risk and guiding clinical decisions in patients with cardiovascular disease is well‐established. To optimize the clinical value of cardiorespiratory fitness, normative reference standards are essential. The purpose of this report is to extend previous cardiorespiratory fitness normative standards by providing updated cardiorespiratory fitness reference standards according to cardiovascular disease category and testing modality.

Methods and Results

The analysis included 15 045 tests (8079 treadmill, 6966 cycle) from FRIEND (Fitness Registry and the Importance of Exercise National Database). Using data from tests conducted January 1, 1974, through March 1, 2021, percentiles of directly measured peak oxygen consumption (VO_2peak) were determined for each decade from 30 through 89 years of age for men and women with a diagnosis of coronary artery bypass surgery, myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, or heart failure. There were significant differences between sex and age groups for VO_2peak (P<0.001). The mean VO_2peak was 23% higher for men compared with women and VO_2peak decreased by a mean of 7% per decade for both sexes. Among each decade, the mean VO_2peak from treadmill tests was 21% higher than the VO_2peak from cycle tests. Differences in VO_2peak were observed among the age groups in both sexes according to cardiovascular disease category.

Conclusions

This report provides normative reference standards by cardiovascular disease category for both men and women performing cardiopulmonary exercise testing on a treadmill or cycle ergometer. These updated and enhanced reference standards can assist with patient risk stratification and guide clinical care.

Provision of exercise services in patients with peripheral artery disease in the United Kingdom

Objectives

Supervised exercise programmes (SEPs) are a vital treatment for people with intermittent claudication, leading improvements in walking distance and quality of life and are recommended in multiple national and international guidelines. We aimed to evaluate the use and structure of SEPs in the United Kingdom (UK).

Design

We conducted an anonymous online survey using the Jisc platform comprising of 40 questions. The survey was designed to address key areas such as access, provision, uptake and delivery of SEPs in the United Kingdom. Ethical approval was obtained from Coventry University (P108729).

Methods

The list of trusts providing vascular services was obtained from the National Vascular Registry (NVR) report. The survey was disseminated via social media, The Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland and the Society for Vascular Technology. Data were exported to a Microsoft Excel document and analysed using simple descriptive statistics.

Results

Of 93 vascular units identified, we received response from 48. Of these, 23 had access to an exercise programme (48%). The majority of SEPs were exclusively for PAD patients (77%), with 21% using integrated services. 67% of respondents were providing a circuit-based programme, and 5 out of 23 were meeting the dose recommendations in the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. Respondents felt that programmes were moderately to extremely important to patients, slightly to very important to clinicians and not at all important to slightly important to commissioning/funding bodies.

Conclusion

SEPs are a well-established first-line treatment for patients with IC and they are recommended by NICE guidelines. Despite this, many patients still do not have access to an exercise programme, and clinicians do not feel that they have support from commissioning/funding bodies to develop them. There is an urgent need for funding, development and delivery of SEPs in the United Kingdom.