Cardiac rehabilitation in Switzerland. Efficacy of the residential approach following bypass surgery

Cardiac rehabilitation for patients having cardiac surgery: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is recommended for all cardiac patients including patients after cardiac surgery. Since the effect of CR after cardiac surgery has not been well established yet, we conducted a systematic review on the effects of CR for patients after cardiac surgery compared to treatment as usual.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), quasi-randomized and prospective observational studies in The Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE was undertaken until October 18th, 2017. Adults after any kind of cardiac surgery were included. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality, other outcomes were serious adverse events, health-related quality of life, work participation, functioning and costs/cost-effectiveness. Risk of bias was evaluated, and the quality of evidence was assessed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Eighteen RCTs and 15 observational studies were included. Low risk of bias was only observed in one observational study. Meta-analysis of RCTs suggested no significant difference of CR compared to control on mortality (random-effects relative risk (RR) 0.93 (95% CI: 0.40-1.81), while observational studies suggested statistically significant beneficial effect associated with CR (random-effects RR=0.49, 95% CI: 0.35 - 0.68). CR did not significantly affect any of the other outcomes. Due to the limited data TSA could not be performed.

CONCLUSIONS

The body of evidence does not allow us to reach any reliable conclusions about the effectiveness of CR following cardiac surgery. Future trials need to be conducted with low risks of bias and clearly defined outcomes.

[Cardiac rehabilitation after coronary artery bypass surgery]

Ischemic heart disease is the leading cause of death worldwide with an increase in the incidence in younger populations. Today revascularization strategies are capable of alleviating acute ischemia and/or chronic ischemia. These can be performed percutaneously or through surgery. Even if we improve myocardial perfusion by these methods, the main determinant in maintaining patency of coronary arteries and bypass is a correctly instituted secondary prevention. This is the main focus of cardiac rehabilitation proposals. Although much has been published about the role of cardiac rehabilitation after percutaneous revascularization, there is little work able to synthesize the current state of cardiac rehabilitation in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery. The aim of this paper is to review the effect of rehabilitation in the return to work, survival, functional capacity, depression and anxiety, as well as compare centralized vs. home rehabilitation in this patient population.

Care home versus hospital and own home environments for rehabilitation of older people

BACKGROUND

Rehabilitation for older people has acquired an increasingly important profile for both policy-makers and service providers within health and social care agencies. This has generated an increased interest in the use of alternative care environments including care home environments. Yet, there appears to be limited evidence on which to base decisions.This review is the first update of the Cochrane review which was published in 2003.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of care home environments (e.g. nursing home, residential care home and nursing facilities) versus hospital environments and own home environments in the rehabilitation of older people.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Specialised Register and Pending Folder, MEDLINE (1950 to March Week 3 2007), EMBASE (1980 to 2007 Week 13), CINAHL (1982 to March, Week 4, 2007), other databases and reference lists of relevant review articles were additionally reviewed. Date of most recent search: March 2007.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), controlled clinical trials (CCTs), controlled before and after studies (CBAs) and interrupted time series (ITS) that compared rehabilitation outcomes for persons 60 years or older who received rehabilitation whilst residing in a care home with those who received rehabilitation in hospital or own home environments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

In this update, 8365 references were retrieved. Of these, 339 abstracts were independently assessed by 2 review authors, and 56 studies and 5 review articles were subsequently obtained. Full text papers were independently assessed by two or three review authors and none of these met inclusion criteria.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to compare the effects of care home environments versus hospital environments or own home environments on older persons rehabilitation outcomes. Although the authors acknowledge that absence of effect is not no effect. There are three main reasons; the first is that the description and specification of the environment is often not clear; secondly, the components of the rehabilitation system within the given environments are not adequately specified and; thirdly, when the components are clearly specified they demonstrate that the control and intervention sites are not comparable with respect to the methodological criteria specified by Cochrane EPOC group. The combined effect of these factors resulted in the comparability between intervention and control groups being very weak.

A randomized comparison of exercise training in patients with normal vs reduced ventricular function

BACKGROUND

Exercise training is recommended after myocardial infarction (MI) or bypass surgery in order to improve exercise tolerance. In some patients, the decrement in exercise capacity secondary to deconditioning and the left ventricular stunning associated with MI or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) spontaneously improves after the event. However, the impact of the status of the left ventricle on these improvements is unknown.

METHODS

Sixty-seven patients 1 month after MI or CABG were randomized to a training (n=34; age, 59+/-7 years) or a control group (n=33; age, 55+/-6 years). Forty-two patients had an ejection fraction >50% (22 in the training group and 20 in the control group), and 25 patients had an ejection fraction <40% (12 in the exercise group and 13 in the control group). After stabilization for approximately 1 month after the event, patients in the exercise group underwent 8 weeks of twice daily exercise at a residential rehabilitation center, while control patients received usual care. Initially and after 8 weeks, patients in both groups underwent maximal exercise testing with gas exchange and lactate analysis.

RESULTS

Exercise training increased peak oxygen consumption (VO2) only in the reduced ejection fraction group (19.4+/-3.0 to 23.9+/-4.8 mL/kg/min; p<0.05); the exercise group with normal ventricular function did not change significantly. Changes in VO2 at the lactate threshold paralleled those of peak VO2 for both groups. Conversely, control patients with normal ventricular function increased peak VO2 spontaneously (20.8+/-3.9 to 24.8+/-3.5 mL/kg/min; p<0.01), whereas control patients with reduced ventricular function did not improve peak VO2.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that patients with depressed left ventricular function strongly benefit from rehabilitation, whereas most patients with preserved left ventricular function following MI or CABG tend to improve spontaneously 1 to 3 months after the event.

Effect of residential cardiac rehabilitation following bypass surgery. Observations in Switzerland

BACKGROUND

Cardiac rehabilitation in central Europe traditionally involves isolating patients in a residential idyllic setting where exercise is performed frequently but in a relatively unstructured fashion. Few studies have been performed on the effects of these programs among patients who have undergone bypass surgery. Recent data suggest that postbypass patients may enter these programs too soon after surgery or that exercise is not structured enough to distinguish the benefits of rehabilitation from those experienced by a control group.

METHODS

Forty-two male patients (mean age, 58 +/- 7 years) were divided into exercise and control groups approximately 1 month after undergoing bypass surgery. Exercise training consisted of 1 h of group walking twice daily, with the intensity stratified into four levels based on initial exercise capacity. Using a crossover design, patients in the exercise group participated in rehabilitation for 1 month, followed by 1 month of usual care, while control patients underwent the opposite sequence. At 1, 2, and 3 months, patients in both groups underwent pulmonary function testing and maximal ramp exercise testing using lactate and gas exchange analysis.

RESULTS

A main effect for maximal oxygen uptake was observed; significant improvements within each group occurred across each testing period (range, 5 to 13%; p < 0.05). However, there was no significant interaction between groups. Mean lactate levels throughout exercise were reduced within both groups (p < 0.01). A reduction in oxygen uptake for test 2 at the lactate threshold in the exercise group resulted in differences between groups in lactate, heart rate, and other gas exchange variables at this point.

CONCLUSION

Similar changes occur in the functional status of postbypass surgery patients regardless of their participation in the short but concentrated programs common in central Europe. This suggests that a significant spontaneous effect of healing occurs in the recovery phase after surgery. These programs may have greater efficacy if they began later after surgery, lasted longer, or were more structured, and studies are needed to determine their effect on psychosocial factors and return to work.