Effects of Supervised Cardiac Rehabilitation Programmes on Quality of Life among Myocardial Infarction Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Metadatos
Mostrar el registro completo del ítemAutor
Mansilla Chacón, María; Gómez Urquiza, Jose Luis; Martos Cabrera, María Begoña; Albendín García, Luis; Romero Béjar, José Luis; Cañadas De La Fuente, Guillermo Arturo; Suleiman Martos, NoraEditorial
MDPI
Materia
Cardiac rehabilitation Education Quality of life Myocardial infarction Systematic review
Fecha
2021-11-27Referencia bibliográfica
Mansilla-Chacón, M... [et al.]. Effects of Supervised Cardiac Rehabilitation Programmes on Quality of Life among Myocardial Infarction Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Cardiovasc. Dev. Dis. 2021, 8, 166. [https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd8120166]
Resumen
Coronary heart disease is the leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Traditionally,
cardiac rehabilitation programmes are offered after cardiac events to aid recovery, improve quality of
life, and reduce adverse events. The objective of this review was to assess the health-related quality
of life, after a supervised cardiac rehabilitation programme, of patients who suffered a myocardial
infarction. A systematic review was carried out in the CINAHL, Cochrane, LILACS, Medline, Scopus,
and SciELO databases, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and
Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Randomised controlled trials were selected. Meta-analyses were
performed for the Short Form Health Survey SF-36, Myocardial Infarction Dimensional Assessment
Scale (MIDAS), MacNew Heart Disease-Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQL) questionnaire, and
European Quality of Life-Visual Analogue Scale (EuroQol-VAS) with the software Cochrane RevMan
Web. Ten articles were found covering a total of 3577 patients. In the meta-analysis, the effect size
of the cardiac rehabilitation programme was statistically significant in the intervention group for
physical activity, emotional reaction, and dependency dimensions of the MIDAS questionnaire. For
the control group, the score improved for SF-36 physical functioning, and body pain dimensions. The
mean difference between the control and intervention group was not significant for the remaining
dimensions, and neither for the MacNew Heart Disease-HRQL and EuroQol-VAS questionnaires.
Supervised cardiac rehabilitation programmes were effective in improving health-related quality
of life, however, there was a potential variability in the interventions; therefore, the results should
be interpreted with caution. This study supports the importance of providing care and evaluating
interventions via the supervision of trained health professionals, and further randomised clinical
trials are needed to analyse the positive changes in mental and physical health outcomes.