Search

Background: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) improves outcomes in heart disease yet remains vastly underutilized. Remote CR enhanced with a digital health intervention (DHI) may offer higher access and improved patient-centered outcomes over non-technology approaches. We sought to pragmatically determine whether offering a DHI improves CR access, cardiac risk profile, and patient-reported outcome measures., Methods: Adults referred to CR at a tertiary VA medical center between October 2017 and December 2021 were offered enrollment into a DHI alongside other CR modalities using shared decision-making. The DHI consisted of remote CR with a structured, 3-month home exercise program enhanced with multi-component coaching, a commercial smartphone app, and wearable activity tracker. We measured completion rates among DHI participants and evaluated changes in 6-min walk distance, cardiovascular risk factors, and patient-reported outcomes from pre- to post-intervention., Results: Among 1,643 patients referred to CR, 258 (16%) consented to the DHI where the mean age was 60 ± 9 years, 93% were male, and 48% were black. A majority (90%) of the DHI group completed the program. Over 3-months, significant improvements were seen in 6MWT (mean difference [MD] -29 m; 95% CI, 10 to 49; P < 0.01) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (MD -11 mg/dL; 95% CI, -17 to -5; P < 0.01), and the absolute proportion of patients who reported smoking decreased (10% vs 15%; MD, -5%; 95% CI, -8% to -2%; P < 0.01) among DHI participants with available data. No adverse events were reported., Conclusions: The addition of a DHI-enhanced remote CR program was delivered in 16% of referred veterans and associated with improved CR access, markers of cardiovascular risk, and healthy behaviors in this real-world study. These findings support the continued implementation of DHIs for remote CR in real-world clinical settings., Trial Registration: This trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02791685 (07/06/2016)., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: There is marked geographic variation in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) initiation, ranging from 10% to 40% of eligible patients at the state level. The potential causes of this variation, such as patient access to CR centers, are not well studied., Objectives: The authors sought to determine how access to CR centers affects CR initiation in Medicare beneficiaries., Methods: The authors used Medicare files to identify CR-eligible Medicare beneficiaries and calculate CR initiation rates at the hospital referral region (HRR) level. We used linear regression to evaluate the percent variation in CR initiation accounted for by CR access across HRRs. We then employed geospatial hotspot analysis to identify CR deserts, or counties in which patient load per CR center is disproportionately high., Results: A total of 1,133,657 Medicare beneficiaries were eligible for CR from 2014 to 2017, of whom 263,310 (23%) initiated CR. The West North Central Census Division had the highest adjusted CR initiation rate (35.4%) and the highest density of CR programs (6.58 per 1,000 CR-eligible Medicare beneficiaries). Density of CR programs accounted for 21.2% of geographic variation in CR initiation at the HRR level. A total of 40 largely urban counties comprising 14% of the United States population age ≥65 years had disproportionately low CR access and were identified as CR deserts., Conclusions: A substantial proportion of geographic variation in CR initiation was related to access to CR programs, with a significant amount of the U.S. population living in CR deserts. These data invite further study on interventions to increase CR access., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This project was supported by the Vanderbilt Clinical and Translational Science grant UL1TR000445 (Bachmann) and grant KL2TR001996 (Duncan) from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences at the National Institutes of Health, grant K12HS022990 (Bachmann) from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and grant 1IK2HX003021 (Bachmann) from the Health Services Research and Development Service of the Department of Veterans Affairs. The content is the responsibility of the authors alone and does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the above agencies, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Dr Bachmann has served as a consultant for ZOLL Medical, Inc (modest). All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background Home-based cardiac rehabilitation (HBCR) and traditional facility-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs have similar effects on mortality in clinical trials and meta-analyses. However, the effect of HBCR on mortality in clinical practice settings is less clear. Therefore, we sought to compare mortality rates in HBCR participants versus nonparticipants. Methods and Results We evaluated all patients who were referred to and eligible for outpatient CR between 2013 and 2018 at the San Francisco Veterans Health Administration. Patients who chose to attend facility-based CR and those who died within 30 days of hospitalization were excluded. Patients who chose to participate in HBCR received up to 9 telephonic coaching and motivational interviewing sessions over 12 weeks. All patients were followed through June 30, 2021. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models with inverse probability treatment weighting to compare mortality in HBCR participants versus nonparticipants. Of the 1120 patients (mean age 68, 98% male, 76% White) who were referred and eligible, 490 (44%) participated in HBCR. During a median follow-up of 4.2 years, 185 patients (17%) died. Mortality was lower among the 490 HBCR participants versus the 630 nonparticipants (12% versus 20%; P <0.01). In an inverse probability weighted Cox regression analysis adjusted for patient demographics and comorbid conditions, the hazard of mortality remained 36% lower among HBCR participants versus nonparticipants (hazard ratio, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.45-0.90], P =0.01). Conclusions Among patients eligible for CR, participation in HBCR was associated with 36% lower hazard of mortality. Although unmeasured confounding can never be eliminated in an observational study, our findings suggest that HBCR may benefit patients who cannot attend traditional CR programs.

Purpose of Review: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is grossly under-utilized. This review summarizes current knowledge about degree of CR utilization, reasons for under-utilization, and strategies to increase use., Recent Findings: ICCPR's global CR audit quantified for the first time the number of additional CR spots needed per year to treat indicated patients, so there are programs they may use. The first randomized trial of automatic/systematic CR referral has shown it results in significantly greater patient completion. Moreover, the recent update of the Cochrane review on interventions to increase use has provided unequivocal evidence on the significant impact of clinician CR encouragement at the bedside; a course is now available to train clinicians. The USA is leading the way in implementing automatic referral with inpatient-clinician CR discussions. Suggestions to triage patients based on risk to less resource-intensive, unsupervised program models could simultaneously expand capacity and support patient adherence., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background Cardiac rehabilitation is an established performance measure for adults with ischemic heart disease, but patient participation is remarkably low. Home-based cardiac rehabilitation (HBCR) may be more practical and feasible, but evidence regarding its efficacy is limited. We sought to compare the effects of HBCR versus facility-based cardiac rehabilitation (FBCR) on functional status in patients with ischemic heart disease. Methods and Results This was a pragmatic trial of 237 selected patients with a recent ischemic heart disease event, who enrolled in HBCR or FBCR between August 2015 and September 2017. The primary outcome was 3-month change in distance completed on a 6-minute walk test. Secondary outcomes included rehospitalization as well as patient-reported physical activity, quality of life, and self-efficacy. Characteristics of the 116 patients enrolled in FBCR and 121 enrolled in HBCR were similar, except the mean time from index event to enrollment was shorter for HBCR (25 versus 77 days; P <0.001). As compared with patients undergoing FBCR, those in HBCR achieved greater 3-month gains in 6-minute walk test distance (+95 versus +41 m; P <0.001). After adjusting for demographics, comorbid conditions, and indication, the mean change in 6-minute walk test distance remained significantly greater for patients enrolled in HBCR (+101 versus +40 m; P <0.001). HBCR participants reported greater improvements in quality of life and physical activity but less improvement in exercise self-efficacy. There were no deaths or cardiovascular hospitalizations. Conclusions Patients enrolled in HBCR achieved greater 3-month functional gains than those enrolled in FBCR. Our data suggest that HBCR may safely derive equivalent benefits in exercise capacity and overall program efficacy in selected patients. Registration URL: https://www.clini​caltr​ials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02105246.

Purpose: A minority of eligible patients participate in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs. Availability of home-based CR programs improves participation in CR, yet many continue to decline to enroll. We sought to explore among patients the rationale for declining to participate in CR even when a home-based CR program is available., Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods evaluation of reasons for declining to participate in CR. Between August 2015 and August 2017, a total of 630 patients were referred for CR evaluation during index hospitalization (San Francisco VA Medical Center). Three hundred three patients (48%) declined to participate in CR. Of these, 171 completed a 14-item survey and 10 patients also provided qualitative data through semistructured phone interviews., Results: The most common reason, identified by 61% of patients on the survey, was "I already know what to do for my heart." Interviews helped clarify reasons for nonparticipation and identified system barriers and personal barriers. These interviews further highlighted that declining to participate in CR was often due to competing life priorities, no memory of the initial CR consultation, and inadequate understanding of CR despite referral., Conclusion: We identified that most patients declining to participate in a home-based CR program did not understand the benefits and rationale for CR. This could be related to the timing of the consultation or presentation method. Many patients also indicated that competing life priorities prevented their participation. Modifications in the consultation process and efforts to accommodate personal barriers may improve participation.

Importance: Participation in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs at Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities is low. Most veterans receive CR through purchased care at non-VA programs. However, limited literature exists on the comparison of outcomes between VA and non-VA CR programs., Objective: To compare 1-year mortality and 1-year readmission rates for myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization between VA vs non-VA CR participants., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included 7320 patients hospitalized for myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization at the VA between 2010 and 2014 who did not die within 30 days of discharge and who participated in 2 or more CR sessions after discharge. The study excluded individuals hospitalized for ischemic heart disease after December 2014 when the VA Choice Act changed referral criteria for non-VA care. Data analysis was performed from November 2019 to January 2020., Exposures: Participation in 2 or more CR sessions within 12 months of discharge at a VA or non-VA facility., Main Outcomes and Measures: The 1-year all-cause mortality and 1-year readmission rates for myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization from date of discharge were compared between VA vs non-VA CR participants using Cox proportional hazards models with inverse probability treatment weighting., Results: The 7320 veterans with ischemic heart disease who participated in CR programs had a mean (SD) age of 65.13 (8.17) years and were predominantly white (6005 patients [82.0%]), non-Hispanic (6642 patients [91.0%]), and male (7191 patients [98.2%]). Among these 7320 veterans, 2921 (39.9%) attended a VA facility, and 4399 (60.1%) attended a non-VA CR facility. Black and Hispanic veterans were more likely to attend CR programs at VA facilities (509 patients [17.4%] and 378 patients [12.9%], respectively), whereas white veterans were more likely to attend CR programs at non-VA facilities (3759 patients [85.5%]). After inverse probability treatment weighting, rates of 1-year mortality were 1.7% among VA CR participants vs 1.3% among non-VA CR participants (hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.90-1.94; P = .15). Rates of readmission for myocardial infarction or revascularization during the 12 months after discharge were 4.9% among VA CR participants vs 4.4% among non-VA CR participants (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.83-1.35; P = .62)., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that rates of 1-year mortality and 1-year readmission for myocardial infarction or revascularization did not differ for participants in VA vs non-VA cardiac rehabilitation programs. Eligible patients with ischemic heart disease should participate in CR programs regardless of where they are provided.

Background: Despite cardiac rehabilitation (CR) being shown to improve health outcomes among patients with heart disease, its use has been suboptimal. In response, the Million Hearts Cardiac Rehabilitation Collaborative developed a road map to improve CR use, including increasing participation rates to ≥70% by 2022. This observational study provides current estimates to measure progress and identifies the populations and regions most at risk for CR service underutilization., Methods and Results: We identified Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who were CR eligible in 2016, and assessed CR participation (≥1 CR session attended), timely initiation (participation within 21 days of event), and completion (≥36 sessions attended) through 2017. Measures were assessed overall, by beneficiary characteristics and geography, and by primary CR-qualifying event type (acute myocardial infarction hospitalization; coronary artery bypass surgery; heart valve repair/replacement; percutaneous coronary intervention; or heart/heart-lung transplant). Among 366 103 CR-eligible beneficiaries, 89 327 (24.4%) participated in CR, of whom 24.3% initiated within 21 days and 26.9% completed CR. Eligibility was highest in the East South Central Census Division (14.8 per 1000). Participation decreased with increasing age, was lower among women (18.9%) compared with men (28.6%; adjusted prevalence ratio: 0.91 [95% CI, 0.90-0.93]) was lower among Hispanics (13.2%) and non-Hispanic blacks (13.6%) compared with non-Hispanic whites (25.8%; adjusted prevalence ratio: 0.63 [0.61-0.66] and 0.70 [0.67-0.72], respectively), and varied by hospital referral region and Census Division (range: 18.6% [East South Central] to 39.1% [West North Central]) and by qualifying event type (range: 7.1% [acute myocardial infarction without procedure] to 55.3% [coronary artery bypass surgery only]). Timely initiation varied by geography and qualifying event type; completion varied by geography., Conclusions: Only 1 in 4 CR-eligible Medicare beneficiaries participated in CR and marked disparities were observed. Reinforcement of current effective strategies and development of new strategies will be critical to address the noted disparities and achieve the 70% participation goal.

Importance: National guidelines recommend cardiac rehabilitation (CR) after cardiac valve surgery, and CR is covered by Medicare for this indication. However, few data exist regarding current CR enrollment after valve surgery., Objective: To characterize CR enrollment after cardiac valve surgery and its association with outcomes, including hospitalizations and mortality., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study of patients undergoing valve surgery was conducted in calendar year 2014, with follow-up through 2015. The study included all fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries undergoing open cardiac valve surgery in 2014. Patients identified by inpatient diagnosis codes for open aortic, mitral, tricuspid, and pulmonary valve surgery were included. Data analysis occurred from January 2018 to March 2019., Exposures: Logistic regression was used to evaluate sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with CR enrollment., Main Outcomes and Measures: We used Andersen-Gill models to evaluate the association of CR enrollment with 1-year hospitalization risk and Cox regression models to evaluate the association of CR enrollment with 1-year mortality risk., Results: A total of 41 369 Medicare beneficiaries (median [interquartile range] age, 73 [68-79] years; 16 935 [40.9%] female) underwent open valve surgery in the United States in 2014. Fewer than half of patients (17 855 [43.2%]) who had valve surgery enrolled in CR programs. Several racial/ethnic groups had lower odds of enrolling in CR programs after valve surgery compared with white patients, including Asian patients (odds ratio [OR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.28-0.47]), black patients (OR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.54-0.67]), and Hispanic patients (OR, 0.36 [95% CI, 0.28-0.46]). Patients undergoing concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting had higher odds of CR enrollment (OR, 1.26 [95% CI, 1.20-1.31]) than those without the concomitant coronary artery bypass graft procedure, as did patients in the Midwest census region (OR, 2.40 [95% CI, 2.28-2.54]) compared with those in the South (reference). Cardiac rehabilitation enrollment was associated with fewer hospitalizations within 1 year of discharge (hazard ratio, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.63-0.69] after multivariable adjustment). Enrollment was also associated with a 4.2% absolute decrease in 1-year mortality risk (hazard ratio, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.35-0.44] after multivariable adjustment)., Conclusions and Relevance: Fewer than half of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing cardiac valve surgery enroll in CR programs, and there are marked racial/ethnic disparities among those that do. Cardiac rehabilitation is associated with decreased 1-year cumulative hospitalization and mortality risk after valve surgery. These results invite further study on barriers to CR enrollment in this population.

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is an evidence-based intervention that uses patient education, health behavior modification, and exercise training to improve secondary prevention outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. CR programs reduce morbidity and mortality rates in adults with ischemic heart disease, heart failure, or cardiac surgery but are significantly underused, with only a minority of eligible patients participating in CR in the United States. New delivery strategies are urgently needed to improve participation. One potential strategy is home-based CR (HBCR). In contrast to center-based CR services, which are provided in a medically supervised facility, HBCR relies on remote coaching with indirect exercise supervision and is provided mostly or entirely outside of the traditional center-based setting. Although HBCR has been successfully deployed in the United Kingdom, Canada, and other countries, most US healthcare organizations have little to no experience with such programs. The purpose of this scientific statement is to identify the core components, efficacy, strengths, limitations, evidence gaps, and research necessary to guide the future delivery of HBCR in the United States. Previous randomized trials have generated low- to moderate-strength evidence that HBCR and center-based CR can achieve similar improvements in 3- to 12-month clinical outcomes. Although HBCR appears to hold promise in expanding the use of CR to eligible patients, additional research and demonstration projects are needed to clarify, strengthen, and extend the HBCR evidence base for key subgroups, including older adults, women, underrepresented minority groups, and other higher-risk and understudied groups. In the interim, we conclude that HBCR may be a reasonable option for selected clinically stable low- to moderate-risk patients who are eligible for CR but cannot attend a traditional center-based CR program., (Copyright © 2019 American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation, the American Heart Association, Inc., and the American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is an evidence-based intervention that uses patient education, health behavior modification, and exercise training to improve secondary prevention outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. CR programs reduce morbidity and mortality rates in adults with ischemic heart disease, heart failure, or cardiac surgery but are significantly underused, with only a minority of eligible patients participating in CR in the United States. New delivery strategies are urgently needed to improve participation. One potential strategy is home-based CR (HBCR). In contrast to center-based CR services, which are provided in a medically supervised facility, HBCR relies on remote coaching with indirect exercise supervision and is provided mostly or entirely outside of the traditional center-based setting. Although HBCR has been successfully deployed in the United Kingdom, Canada, and other countries, most US healthcare organizations have little to no experience with such programs. The purpose of this scientific statement is to identify the core components, efficacy, strengths, limitations, evidence gaps, and research necessary to guide the future delivery of HBCR in the United States. Previous randomized trials have generated low- to moderate-strength evidence that HBCR and center-based CR can achieve similar improvements in 3- to 12-month clinical outcomes. Although HBCR appears to hold promise in expanding the use of CR to eligible patients, additional research and demonstration projects are needed to clarify, strengthen, and extend the HBCR evidence base for key subgroups, including older adults, women, underrepresented minority groups, and other higher-risk and understudied groups. In the interim, we conclude that HBCR may be a reasonable option for selected clinically stable low- to moderate-risk patients who are eligible for CR but cannot attend a traditional center-based CR program.

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is an evidence-based intervention that uses patient education, health behavior modification, and exercise training to improve secondary prevention outcomes in patients with cardiovascular disease. CR programs reduce morbidity and mortality rates in adults with ischemic heart disease, heart failure, or cardiac surgery but are significantly underused, with only a minority of eligible patients participating in CR in the United States. New delivery strategies are urgently needed to improve participation. One potential strategy is home-based CR (HBCR). In contrast to center-based CR services, which are provided in a medically supervised facility, HBCR relies on remote coaching with indirect exercise supervision and is provided mostly or entirely outside of the traditional center-based setting. Although HBCR has been successfully deployed in the United Kingdom, Canada, and other countries, most US healthcare organizations have little to no experience with such programs. The purpose of this scientific statement is to identify the core components, efficacy, strengths, limitations, evidence gaps, and research necessary to guide the future delivery of HBCR in the United States. Previous randomized trials have generated low- to moderate-strength evidence that HBCR and center-based CR can achieve similar improvements in 3- to 12-month clinical outcomes. Although HBCR appears to hold promise in expanding the use of CR to eligible patients, additional research and demonstration projects are needed to clarify, strengthen, and extend the HBCR evidence base for key subgroups, including older adults, women, underrepresented minority groups, and other higher-risk and understudied groups. In the interim, we conclude that HBCR may be a reasonable option for selected clinically stable low- to moderate-risk patients who are eligible for CR but cannot attend a traditional center-based CR program.

Background Mental health conditions are associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischemic heart disease, and much of this risk can be attributed to poor health behaviors. Although all patients with ischemic heart disease should be referred for cardiac rehabilitation (CR), whether patients with mental health conditions are willing to participate in CR programs is unknown. We sought to compare CR participation rates among patients with ischemic heart disease with versus without comorbid depression and/or posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Methods and Results We used national electronic health records to identify all patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization at Veterans Health Administration hospitals between 2010 and 2014. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to determine whether comorbid depression/PTSD was associated with CR participation during the 12 months after hospital discharge. Of the 86 537 patients hospitalized for ischemic heart disease between 2010 and 2014, 24% experienced PTSD and/or depression. Patients with PTSD and/or depression had higher CR participation rates than those without PTSD or depression (11% versus 8%; P<0.001). In comparison to patients without PTSD or depression, the odds of participation was 24% greater in patients with depression alone (odds ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.15-1.34), 38% greater in patients with PTSD alone (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.24-1.54), and 57% greater in patients with both PTSD and depression (odds ratio, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.43-1.74). Conclusions Among patients with ischemic heart disease, the presence of comorbid depression and/or PTSD is associated with greater participation in CR, providing an important opportunity to promote healthy lifestyle behaviors and reduce adverse cardiovascular outcomes among these patients.

Traditional, facility-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is vastly underutilized in the United States. The Veterans Health Administration (VA) has developed new home-based cardiac rehabilitation (HBCR) programs to address this issue. However, the characteristics of patients who choose HBCR are unknown. We sought to determine predictors of participation and completion of HBCR at the San Francisco VA (SFVA). We evaluated patients hospitalized for ischemic heart disease between 2013 and 2016 at SFVA. Logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of participation and completion of HBCR. In 724 patients with ischemic heart disease who were eligible for CR between 2013 and 2016, 314 (43%) enrolled in HBCR. Older age was associated with lower odds of participation in HBCR (odds ratio [OR] 0.84; p <0.01). Additionally, patients with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) were twice as likely as those with percutaneous coronary intervention to participate in HBCR (OR 2.03; 95% confidence interval 1.40, 2.97). In HBCR participants, 48% (150/314) completed ≥9 sessions. Patients with CABG were twice as likely as those with percutaneous coronary intervention to complete the HBCR program (OR 2.02; 95% confidence interval 1.18, 3.44). There were no differences in participation or completion rates by gender, race, ethnicity, or rurality. Our study showed that the SFVAMC HCBR program achieved a 43% participation rate, well above the VA average of 13%. There were no disparities by gender, race, or rurality in terms of participation and adherence. CABG as the indication for CR was the most significant predictor of participation and completion of HBCR., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is strongly recommended after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but it is underused. We sought to evaluate CR participation variation after PCI and its association with mortality among veterans. Methods and Results Patients undergoing PCI between 2007 and 2011 were identified in the Veterans Affairs Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking database and followed up until January 25, 2017. We excluded patients who died within 30 days of PCI and calculated the percentage participating in ≥1 outpatient CR visits within 12 months after PCI. We constructed multivariable hierarchical logistic regression models for CR participation, clustered by facility. We estimated propensity scores for CR participation, matched participants and nonparticipants by propensity score, calculated mortality rates, and estimated the association with mortality using Cox proportional hazards models. Participation in CR after PCI was 6.9% (2986/43 319) and varied significantly by PCI facility (range, 0%-36%). After 6.1 years median follow-up, CR participants had a 33% lower mortality rate than all nonparticipants (3.8 versus 5.7 deaths/100 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.67; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.75; P<0.001) and a 26% lower mortality rate than 2986 propensity-matched nonparticipants (3.8 versus 5.1 deaths/100 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.84; P<0.001). Participants attending ≥36 sessions had the lowest mortality rate (2.4 deaths/100 person-years; hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.60; P<0.001). Conclusions CR participation after PCI among veterans is low overall, with significant facility-level variation. CR participation is associated with lower mortality rates in veterans. Additional efforts are needed to promote CR participation after PCI among veterans.

Background: Cardiac rehabilitation is strongly recommended after myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery bypass surgery, but it is historically underused. We sought to evaluate variation in cardiac rehabilitation participation across the United States., Methods: From administrative data from the Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system and a 5% Medicare sample, we used International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision codes to identify patients hospitalized for myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery bypass surgery from 2007 to 2011. After excluding patients who died in ≤30 days of hospitalization, we calculated the percentage of patients who participated in ≥1 outpatient visits for cardiac rehabilitation during the 12 months after hospitalization. We estimated adjusted and standardized rates of participation in cardiac rehabilitation by state using hierarchical logistic regression models., Results: Overall, participation in cardiac rehabilitation was 16.3% (23 403/143 756) in Medicare and 10.3% (9123/88 826) in VA. However, participation rates varied widely across states, ranging from 3.2% to 41.8% in Medicare and 1.2% to 47.6% in VA. Similar regional variation was observed in both populations. Patients in the West North Central region (Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota) had the highest participation, whereas those in the Pacific region (Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington) had the lowest participation in both Medicare (33.7% versus 10.6%) and VA (16.6% versus 5.1%) populations. Significant hospital-level variation was also present, with participation ranging from 3% to 75% in Medicare and 1% to 43% in VA., Conclusions: Cardiac rehabilitation participation remains low overall in both Medicare and VA populations. However, remarkably similar regional variation exists, with some regions and hospitals achieving high rates of participation in both populations. This provides an opportunity to identify best practices from higher performing hospitals and regions that could be used to improve cardiac rehabilitation participation in lower performing hospitals and regions., (© 2018 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is under-utilized. CR is indicated after heart transplantation, but there are no data regarding CR participation in transplant recipients. We characterized current CR utilization among heart transplant recipients in the United States and the association of CR with 1-year readmissions using the 2013-2014 Medicare files., Methods: The study population included Medicare beneficiaries enrolled due to disability (patients on the transplant list are eligible for disability benefits under Medicare regulations) or age ≥65 years. We identified heart transplant patients by diagnosis codes and cumulative CR sessions occurring within 1 year after the transplant hospitalization., Results: There were 2,531 heart transplant patients in the USA in 2013, of whom 595 (24%) received Medicare coverage and were included in the study. CR utilization was low, with 326 patients (55%) participating in CR programs. The Midwest had the highest proportion of transplant recipients initiating CR (68%, p = 0.001). Patients initiating CR attended a mean of 26.7 (standard deviation 13.3) sessions, less than the generally prescribed program of 36 sessions. Transplant recipients age 35 to 49 years were less likely to initiate CR (odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23 to 0.66, p < 0.001) and attended 8.2 fewer sessions (95% CI 3.5 to 12.9, p < 0.001) than patients age ≥65 years. CR participation was associated with a 29% lower 1-year readmission risk (95% CI 13% to 42%, p = 0.001)., Conclusions: Only half of cardiac transplant recipients participate in CR, and those who do have a lower 1-year readmission risk. These data invite further study on barriers to CR in this population., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: This study characterized cardiac rehabilitation (CR) use in ventricular assist device (VAD) recipients in the United States and the association of CR with 1-year hospitalization and mortality by using the 2013 to 2015 Medicare files., Background: Exercise-based CR is indicated in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, but no data exist regarding CR participation after VAD implantation., Methods: The study included Medicare beneficiaries enrolled for disability or age >65 years. The investigators identified VAD recipients by diagnosis codes and cumulated CR sessions occurring within 1 year after VAD implantation. Multivariable-adjusted Andersen-Gill models were used to evaluate the association of CR with 1-year hospitalization risk, and Cox regression was used to evaluate the association of CR with 1-year mortality., Results: There were 1,164 VADs implanted in Medicare beneficiaries in the United States in 2014. CR use was low, with 348 patients (30%) participating in CR programs. The Midwest had the highest proportion of VAD recipients who began CR (38%), whereas the Northeast had the lowest proportion of CR participants (25%). Each 5-year increase in age was associated with attending an additional 1.6 CR sessions (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.7 to 2.5; p < 0.001). CR participation was associated with a 23% lower 1-year hospitalization risk (95% CI: 11% to 33%; p < 0.001) and a 47% lower 1-year mortality risk (95% CI: 18% to 66%; p < 0.01) after multivariable adjustment., Conclusions: Approximately one-third of VAD recipients attend CR. Although it is not possible to account fully for unmeasured confounding, VAD recipients who participate in CR appear to have lower risks for hospitalization and mortality., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is linked to reduced mortality and morbidity, including improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness, psychosocial state, and quality of life in patients with heart failure (HF). However, little is known about CR utilization among patients with HF., Objective: We sought to determine (a) the proportion of patients with HF who participated in CR and (b) patient characteristics associated with participation., Methods: A retrospective study was conducted with the use of national data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Veterans Health Administration. We used primary discharge ICD-9 codes to identify patients hospitalized for HF during 2007-2011 and identified CR participation with the use of current procedure terminology codes from claims data. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify patient characteristics associated with CR participation., Results: There were 66,710 veterans and 243,208 Medicare beneficiaries hospitalized for HF and 1554 (2.3%) and 6280 (2.6%), respectively, who attended ≥1 sessions of outpatient CR. Among Medicare beneficiaries, men were more likely than women to participate in CR (3.7% vs 1.8%; P < .001), but there was no gender difference among veterans (2.3% vs 2.8%; P = .40). Characteristics associated with participation in CR in both groups included younger age, white race, and history of ischemic heart disease., Conclusions: Very few HF patients participated in CR, with lower rates among older non-white women with a history of depression or other chronic medical conditions. Because Medicare has recently introduced coverage for CR in patients with systolic HF, we must increase efforts to improve CR participation, especially among these vulnerable groups., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with ischemic heart disease but are vastly underutilized in the United States, including the Veterans Health Administration (VA) Healthcare System. Numerous barriers affecting utilization have been identified in other health care systems, but the specific factors affecting Veterans are unknown. We sought to identify barriers and facilitators associated with utilization of CR in VA facilities., Methods: We performed a qualitative study of 56 VA patients, providers, and CR program managers at 30 VA facilities across the United States. We conducted semistructured interviews with key informants to explore their attitudes and knowledge toward CR. Interviews were conducted until thematic saturation occurred. Analyses using grounded theory to identify key themes were conducted using the qualitative data analysis package ATLAS.ti., Results: We identified 6 themes as barriers and 5 as facilitators. The most common barriers to participation in CR were patient transportation issues (68%), lack of patient willingness to participate (41%), and no access to a nearby VA hospital with a CR program (30%). The most common facilitators were involvement of a dedicated provider or "clinical champion" (50%), provider knowledge of or experience with CR (48%), and patient desire for additional medical support (32%)., Conclusions: Our findings suggest that addressing access issues and educating and activating providers on CR may increase utilization of CR programs. Targeting these specific factors may improve utilization of CR programs.