Exercise intensity assessment and prescription in cardiovascular rehabilitation and beyond: why and how: a position statement from the Secondary Prevention and Rehabilitation Section of the European Association of Preventive Cardiology.

A proper determination of the exercise intensity is important for the rehabilitation of patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) since it affects the effectiveness and medical safety of exercise training. In 2013, the European Association of Preventive Cardiology (EAPC), together with the American Association of Cardiovascular and Pulmonary Rehabilitation and the Canadian Association of Cardiac Rehabilitation, published a position statement on aerobic exercise intensity assessment and prescription in cardiovascular rehabilitation (CR). Since this publication, many subsequent papers were published concerning the determination of the exercise intensity in CR, in which some controversies were revealed and some of the commonly applied concepts were further refined. Moreover, how to determine the exercise intensity during resistance training was not covered in this position paper. In light of these new findings, an update on how to determine the exercise intensity for patients with CVD is mandatory, both for aerobic and resistance exercises. In this EAPC position paper, it will be explained in detail which objective and subjective methods for CR exercise intensity determination exist for aerobic and resistance training, together with their (dis)advantages and practical applications.

Update on cardiovascular prevention in clinical practice: A position paper of the European Association of Preventive Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology.

European guidelines on cardiovascular prevention in clinical practice were first published in 1994 and have been regularly updated, most recently in 2016, by the Sixth European Joint Task Force. Given the amount of new information that has become available since then, components from the task force and experts from the European Association of Preventive Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology were invited to provide a summary and critical review of the most important new studies and evidence since the latest guidelines were published. The structure of the document follows that of the previous document and has six parts: Introduction (epidemiology and cost effectiveness); Cardiovascular risk; How to intervene at the population level; How to intervene at the individual level; Disease-specific interventions; and Settings: where to intervene? In fact, in keeping with the guidelines, greater emphasis has been put on a population-based approach and on disease-specific interventions, avoiding re-interpretation of information already and previously considered. Finally, the presence of several gaps in the knowledge is highlighted.

Cardiac rehabilitation availability and delivery in Europe: How does it differ by region and compare with other high-income countries?: Endorsed by the European Association of Preventive Cardiology.

AIMS: The aims of this study were to establish cardiac rehabilitation availability and density, as well as the nature of programmes, and to compare these by European region (geoscheme) and with other high-income countries. METHODS: A survey was administered to cardiac rehabilitation programmes globally. Cardiac associations were engaged to facilitate programme identification. Density was computed using global burden of disease study ischaemic heart disease incidence estimates. Four high-income countries were selected for comparison (N = 790 programmes) to European data, and multilevel analyses were performed. RESULTS: Cardiac rehabilitation was available in 40/44 (90.9%) European countries. Data were collected in 37 (94.8% country response rate). A total of 455/1538 (29.6% response rate) programme respondents initiated the survey. Programme volumes (median 300) were greatest in western European countries, but overall were higher than in other high-income countries (P < 0.001). Across all Europe, there was on average only 1 CR spot per 7 IHD patients, with an unmet regional need of 3,449,460 spots annually. Most programmes were funded by social security (n = 25, 59.5%; with significant regional variation, P < 0.001), but in 72 (16.0%) patients paid some or all of the programme costs (or ∼18.5% of the ∼€150.0/programme) out of pocket. Guideline-indicated conditions were accepted in 70% or more of programmes (lower for stable coronary disease), with no regional variation. Programmes had a multidisciplinary team of 6.5 ± 3.0 staff (number and type varied regionally; and European programmes had more staff than other high-income countries), offering 8.5 ± 1.5/10 core components (consistent with other high-income countries) over 24.8 ± 26.0 hours (regional differences, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: European cardiac rehabilitation capacity must be augmented. Where available, services were consistent with guidelines, but varied regionally.

Prevalence and management of familial hypercholesterolemia in patients with coronary artery disease: The heredity survey.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a genetic disorder characterized by high levels of low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) predisposing to premature cardiovascular disease. Its prevalence varies and has been estimated around 1 in 200-500. The Heredity survey evaluated the prevalence of potential FH and the therapeutic approaches among patients with established coronary artery disease (CAD) or peripheral artery disease (PAD) in which it is less well documented. METHODS: Data were collected in patients admitted to programs of rehabilitation and secondary prevention in Italy. Potential FH was estimated using Dutch Lipid Clinic Network (DLCN) criteria. Potential FH was defined as having a total score≥6. RESULTS: Among the 1438 consecutive patients evaluated, the prevalence of potential FH was 3.7%. The prevalence was inversely related to age, with a putative prevalence of 1:10 in those with <55yrs of age (male) and <60yrs (female). Definite FH (DLCN score>8) had the highest percentages of patients after an ACS (75% vs 52.5% in the whole study population). At discharge, most patients were on high intensity statin therapy, but despite this, potential FH group still had a higher percentage of patients with LDL-C levels not at target and having a distance from the target higher than 50%. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with established coronary heart disease, the prevalence of potential FH is higher than in the general population; the results suggest that a correct identification of potential FH, especially in younger patients, may help to better manage their high cardiovascular risk.

Current activities of Cardiovascular Rehabilitation in the ambulatory setting of the Lombardy Region.

In the present work, the current activities of Cardiovascular Rehabilitation and Prevention (CRP) in the ambulatory setting of the Lombardy Region (Italy) are described. Based on the 2012 Legislation, ambulatory CRP is delivered by means of three programme categories (MAC 6, 7, and 8) with different degrees of intensity. The patient evaluation of global cardiovascular/clinical risk, comorbidity, and disability is the cornerstone for MAC prescription. Following the organization of MAC activities, a survey on 327 patients was carried out by the regional network of the Italian Society of Cardiovascular Rehabilitation (GICR-IACPR). Globally, acute coronary syndromes (with or without coronary revascularization) constituted the main access group to CRP. More than 60% of patients displayed a condition of high risk, comorbidity, and disability. The outcome of ambulatory CRP by means of MAC 6 and 7 was satisfactory, while in the 'less intensive' MAC 8 patients with complete drug up-titration and achievement of secondary prevention targets were no more than 70%.

[Standards and outcome measures in cardiovascular rehabilitation. Position paper GICR/IACPR]. / Requisiti e indicatori in cardiologia riabilitativa: documento di consenso del GICR/IACPR.

Despite major improvements in diagnostics and interventional therapies, cardiovascular diseases remain a major health care and socio-economic problem in Italy. Costs and resources required are increasing in close correlation to both the improved quality of care and to the population ageing. There is an overwhelming evidence of the efficacy of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in terms of reduction in morbidity and mortality after acute cardiac events. CR services are by definition multi-factorial and comprehensive. Furthermore, systematic analysis and monitoring of the process of delivery and outcomes is of paramount importance. The aim of this position paper promoted by the Italian Association for Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation (GICR-IACPR) is to provide specific recommendations to assist CR staff in the design, evaluation and development of their care delivery organization. The position paper should also assist health care providers, insurers, policy makers and consumers in the recognition of the quality of care requirements, standards and outcome measure, quality and performance indicators, and professional competence involved in such organization and programs. The position paper i) include comprehensive CR definition and indications, ii) describes priority criteria based on the clinical risk for admission to both inpatient or outpatient CR, and iii) defines components and technological, structural and organizing requirements for inpatient or outpatient CR services, with specific indicators and standards, performance measures and required professional skills. A specific chapter is dedicated to the requirements for highly specialized CR services for patients with more advanced cardiovascular diseases.

The Italian Survey on Cardiac Rehabilitation-2008 (ISYDE-2008). Part 3. National availability and organization of cardiac rehabilitation facilities. Official report of the Italian Association for Cardiovascular Prevention, Rehabilitation and Epidemiology (IACPR-GICR).

From January 28th to February 10th 2008, the Italian Association for Cardiovascular Prevention, Rehabilitation and Epidemiology (IACPR-GICR) conducted the ISYDE-2008 study, the primary aim of which was to take a detailed snapshot of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) provision in Italy--in terms of number and distribution of facilities, staffing levels, organization and setting--and compare the actual CR provision with the recommendations of national guidelines for CR and secondary prevention. The secondary aim was to describe the patient population currently being referred to CR and the components of the programs offered. Out of 190 cardiac rehabilitation centers existing in Italy in 2008, 165 (87%) took part in the study. On a national basis, there is one CR unit every 299,977 inhabitants: in northern Italy there is one CR unit every 263,578 inhabitants, while in central and southern Italy there is one every 384,034 and 434,170 inhabitants, respectively. The majority of CR units are located in public hospitals (59%), the remainder in privately owned health care organizations (41%). Fifty-nine percent are located in hospitals providing both acute and rehabilitation care, 32% are in specifically dedicated rehabilitation structures, while 8% operate in the context of residential long term care for chronic conditions. Almost three-quarters of CR units currently operating are linked to dedicated cardiology divisions (74%), 5% are linked to physical medicine and rehabilitation divisions, 2% to internal medicine, and 19% to cardiac surgery and other divisions. Inhospital care is provided by 62.4% of the centers; outpatient care is provided on a day-hospital basis by 10.9% of facilities and on an ambulatory basis by 20%. The CR units are led in 86% of cases by a cardiologist and in only 14% of cases by specialists in internal medicine, geriatrics, physical medicine and rehabilitation, pneumology or other disciplines. In terms of staffing, each cardiac rehabilitation unit has 4.0 +/- 2.7 dedicated physicians (range 1-16, mode 2), 10.1 +/- 8.0 nurses, 3.3 +/- 2.5 physiotherapists (range 0-20; 16% of services have no physiotherapist in the rehabilitation team), 1.5 +/- 0.8 psychologists, and a dietitian (present in 62% of CR units). Phase II CR programs are available in 67.9% of cases in residential (inpatient) and in 30.9% of cases in outpatient (day-hospital and ambulatory) settings. Phase III programs are offered by 56.4% of the centers in ambulatory outpatient regime, and on an at home basis by 4.8% with telecare supervision, 7.3% without. Long term secondary prevention follow up programs are provided by 42.4% of CR services.