Development of a Simple Clinical Tool for Predicting Early Dropout in Cardiac Rehabilitation: A SINGLE-CENTER RISK MODEL

Clinical challenges facing patient participation in cardiac rehabilitation: cigarette smoking

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is highly effective at reducing morbidity and mortality. However, CR is underutilized, and adherence remains challenging. In no group is CR attendance more challenging than among patients who smoke. Despite being more likely to be referred to CR, they are less likely to enroll, and much more likely to drop out. CR programs generally do not optimally engage and treat those who smoke, but this population is critical to engage given the high-risk nature of continued smoking in those with cardiovascular disease.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers four areas relating to CR in those who smoke. First, we review the evidence of the association between smoking and lack of participation in CR. Second, we examine how smoking has historically been identified in this population and propose objective screening measures for all patients. Third, we discuss the optimal treatment of smoking within CR. Fourth, we review select populations within those who smoke (those with lower-socioeconomic status, females) that require additional research and attention.

EXPERT OPINION

Smoking poses a challenge on multiple fronts, being a significant predictor of future morbidity and mortality, as well as being strongly associated with not completing the secondary prevention program (CR) that could benefit those who smoke the most.

Comparison of Ratings of Perceived Exertion and Target Heart Rate-Based Exercise Prescription in Cardiac Rehabilitation: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED PILOT STUDY

PURPOSE

Although ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) are widely used to guide exercise intensity in cardiac rehabilitation (CR), it is unclear whether target heart rate ranges (THRRs) can be implemented in CR programs that predominantly use RPE and what impact this has on changes in exercise capacity.

METHODS

We conducted a three-group pilot randomized control trial (#NCT03925493) comparing RPE of 3-4 on the 10-point modified Borg scale, 60-80% of heart rate reserve (HRR) with heart rate (HR) monitored by telemetry, or 60-80% of HRR with a personal HR monitor (HRM) for high-fidelity adherence to THRR. Primary outcomes were protocol fidelity and feasibility. Secondary outcomes included exercise HR, RPE, and changes in functional exercise capacity.

RESULTS

Of 48 participants randomized, four patients dropped out, 20 stopped prematurely (COVID-19 pandemic), and 24 completed the protocol. Adherence to THRR was high regardless of HRM, and patients attended a median (IQR) of 33 (23, 36) sessions with no difference between groups. After randomization, HR increased by 1 ± 6, 6 ± 5, and 10 ± 9 bpm ( P = .02); RPE (average score 3.0 ± 0.05) was unchanged, and functional exercise capacity increased by 1.0 ± 1.0, 1.9 ± 1.5, 2.0 ± 1.3 workload METs (effect size between groups, ηp2 = 0.11, P = .20) for the RPE, THRR, and THRR + HRM groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully implemented THRR in an all-RPE CR program without needing an HRM. Patients randomized to THRR had higher exercise HR but similar RPE ratings. The THRR may be preferable to RPE in CR populations for cardiorespiratory fitness gains, but this needs confirmation in an adequately powered trial.

Psychosocial management in cardiac rehabilitation: Current practices, recommendations, and opportunities

Psychosocial management is a core component of outpatient Phase-II cardiac rehabilitation (CR) and includes psychosocial assessment, providing interventions, measuring outcomes, and care coordination. Psychosocial management contributes to the effectiveness of comprehensive CR, but the implementation is not always consistent or clearly described in the literature, in part due to the availability of behavioral health specialists. Patients in CR have many psychosocial needs including anxiety, depression, substance use disorders, sleep problems, psychosocial stress, and cognitive impairment. Behavioral considerations are inherent in many other aspects of CR,such as participation in CR, health behaviors, adherence, and tobacco cessation. Evaluation, or psychosocial assessment, should identify significant issues, record related medications, and incorporate findings in the individual treatment plan. Some patients require further evaluation and treatment by a qualified behavioral health specialist. Psychosocial interventions provided to all patients include patient education, counseling, stress-management, a supportive environment, and exercise. Measuring outcomes entails repeating the psychosocial assessment when patients finish CR and documenting changes. Coordinating care requires understanding available local mental health infrastructure and procedures for making referrals, and may entail identifying additional resources. Interventions provided concurrently with CR to a subset of patients with more extensive needs are typically pharmacotherapy, psychotherapy, or addictions counseling, which are beyond the scope of practice for most CR professionals. The way psychosocial management is implemented suggests clinical and research opportunities. For example, the combined effects of antidepressants and CR on depression and anxiety are not known. A prominent clinical opportunity is to fully implement psychosocial assessment, as required by statute and the core components. This could involve referring patients for whom clinically significant psychosocial concerns are identified during the evaluation for a more thorough assessment by a behavioral health specialist using an appropriate billing model. A research priority is a contemporary description of behavioral health services available to CR programs, including how psychosocial management is implemented. As delivery of CR comes to include more alternative models (e.g., home-based), research is needed on how that affects the delivery of psychosocial management. Increased use of telehealth may broaden clinical opportunities for psychosocial management.

Evaluation of the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation Exercise Risk Stratification Classification Tool Without Exercise Testing

PURPOSE

The American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation (AACVPR) recommends that patients starting cardiac rehabilitation (CR) undergo stratification to identify risk for exercise-related adverse events (AE), but this tool has not been recently evaluated.

METHODS

Among patients who enrolled in CR in 2016, we used the AACVPR risk stratification tool to evaluate the risk for AE and clinical events (CE). We defined AE as signs or symptoms that precluded or interrupted exercise during CR, and CE as events requiring an urgent evaluation outside of CR exercise sessions.

RESULTS

During the study period, 657 patients with cardiovascular diagnoses were included and classified as high (58%), medium (31%), or low risk (11%). Over the course of CR (76 d, 17 sessions), there were 63 AE and 33 CE. Adverse events were mostly minor (no cardiac arrests or deaths) and managed by CR staff members. When compared with the low- or medium-risk groups, the high-risk group was more likely to have AE (HR 3.0 [95% CI, 1.7-5.9], P = .002) and CE (HR 3.7 [95% CI, 1.5-10.8], P = .002) with fair model discrimination (area under the curve: 0.637, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The AACVPR risk stratification tool was predictive of both AE and CE with fair discrimination, although event rates were low and mostly minor. Thus, the AACVPR model may require reevaluation to better identify truly at-risk patients for major AE.