Cardiac Rehabilitation for Women

Women's outcomes following mixed-sex, women-only, and home-based cardiac rehabilitation participation and comparison by sex

BACKGROUND

Despite women's greater need for cardiac rehabilitation (CR), they are less likely to utilize it. Innovative CR models have been developed to better meet women's needs, yet there is little controlled, comparative data assessing the effects of these models for women. This study compared outcomes in women electing to participate in mixed-sex, women-only, or home-based CR, and a matched sample of men.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, electronic records of CR participants in Toronto who were offered the choice of program model between January 2017 and July 2019 were analyzed; clinical outcomes comprised cardiorespiratory fitness, risk factors and psychosocial well-being. These were assessed at intake and post-6-month program and analyzed using general linear mixed models.

RESULTS

There were 1181 patients (727 women [74.7% mixed, 22.0% women-only, 3.3% home-based]; 454 age and diagnosis-matched men) who initiated CR; Cardiorespiratory fitness among women was higher at initiation of mixed-sex than women-only (METs 5.1 ± 1.5 vs 4.6 ± 1.3; P = .007), but no other outcome differences were observed. 428 (58.9%) women completed the programs, with few women retained in the home-based model limiting comparisons. There were significant improvements in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P = .001) and quality of life (P = .001), and lower depressive symptoms (P = .030) as well as waist circumference (P = .001) with mixed-sex only. VO2peak was significantly higher at discharge in mixed-sex than women-only (estimate = 1.67, standard error = 0.63, 95% confidence interval = 0.43-2.91).

CONCLUSION

Participation in non-gender-tailored women-only CR was not advantageous as expected. More research is needed, particularly including women participating in home-based programs.

Barriers for Nonparticipation and Dropout of Women in Cardiac Rehabilitation Programs: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major health problem worldwide. Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs are effective in reducing mortality and improving the quality of life of patients with CVD. Women are under-represented in CR and have a higher dropout rate than men. We aimed to systematically review the literature on barriers perceived by women with CVD affecting their nonparticipation in and/or dropping out from CR programs.

METHODS

Systematic review was done using MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Open Grey, and Cochrane Database from inception to September 2016. Search terms included (1) heart disease and other cardiac conditions, (2) CR and secondary prevention, and (3) nonparticipation in and/or dropout. Databases were searched following the "participants, interventions, comparisons, outcomes, and study design" method.

RESULTS

A total of 24 studies (17 descriptive, 6 qualitative, and 1 randomized controlled trial) reporting several barriers were grouped into five broad categories: intrapersonal barriers (self-reported health, health beliefs, lack of time, motivation, and religious reasons); interpersonal barriers (lack of family/social support and work conflicts); logistical barriers (transport, distance, and availability of personal/community resources); CR program barriers (services offered, group format, exercise component, and CR sessions); and health system barriers (lack of referral, cost, negative experiences with the health system, and language). We found differences between the barriers related to nonparticipation in and dropout from CR programs.

CONCLUSIONS

Women reported multilevel barriers for nonparticipation in and dropout from CR programs. Future clinical guidelines should evaluate and eliminate these barriers to improve adherence to CR programs in women. In addition, understanding the barriers for nonparticipation and dropout may be beneficial for future intervention trials.