Title

Evaluation of the Recommended Core Components of Cardiac Rehabilitation Practice: An Opportunity for Quality Improvement

Publication Title

Journal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention

Publication Date

1-2012

Document Type

Article

DOI

10.1097/HCR.0b013e31823be0e2

Keywords

rehabilitation, coronary artery disease, health surveys, exercise tolerance, statistics

Disciplines

Medicine and Health Sciences | Public Health

Abstract

PURPOSE:

Guidelines have been established that describe recommended core components for cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs; yet, there are no national efforts to monitor the integration of the guidelines. The purpose of this research was to describe incorporation of core components in CR programs.

METHODS:

This was a cross-sectional study using the Ohio Phase II Cardiac Rehabilitation Survey. Descriptive analyses were stratified on American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation (AACVPR) certification, case management, and staff mix.

RESULTS:

Sixty-six percent (n = 94) of programs responded, 39% (n = 37) were AACVPR certified, 40% (n = 38) used case management, and 73% (n = 75) staffed an exercise physiologist. Notable findings included that only 44% of programs obtained/performed a 12-lead electrocardiogram and 36% screened for depression. AACVPR-certified programs compared with uncertified programs were more likely to manage overweight/obesity (100% vs 84% instruct on weight control, respectively, P = .02) and perform health assessments upon admission (89% vs 70% respectively, P = .04). Programs using case management when compared with programs that did not use case management were more likely to administer a health survey (92% vs 65%, respectively, P = .003) and risk stratify (100% vs 84%, respectively, P = .02). Programs with an exercise physiologist were more likely to administer/obtain a stress test when compared with those without an exercise physiologist (78% vs 56%, respectively, P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS:

There was a lack of consistency in the incorporation of core component guidelines; certification, case management, and staff mix offered little improvement. This study provides direction for statewide quality improvement initiatives to improve care delivered in CR programs.


Share

COinS