Psychometric validation of the short version of the Information Needs in Cardiac Rehabilitation scale through a first global assessment.

AIMS: Tailored education is recommended for cardiac patients, yet little is known about information needs in areas of the world where it is most needed. This study aims to assess (i) the measurement properties of the Information Needs in Cardiac Rehabilitation short version (INCR-S) scale and (ii) patient's information needs globally. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this cross-sectional study, English, simplified Chinese, Portuguese, or Korean versions of the INCR-S were administered to in- or out-patients via Qualtrics (January 2022-November 2023). Members of the International Council of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation community facilitated recruitment. Importance and knowledge sufficiency of 36 items were rated. Links to evidence-based lay education were provided where warranted. A total of 1601 patients from 19 middle- and high-income countries across the world participated. Structural validity was supported upon factor analysis, with five subscales extracted: symptom response/medication, heart diseases/diagnostic tests/treatments, exercise and return-to-life roles/programmes to support, risk factors, and healthy eating/psychosocial management. Cronbach's alpha was 0.97. Construct validity was supported through significantly higher knowledge sufficiency ratings for all items and information importance ratings for all subscales in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) enrolees vs. non-enrolees (all P < 0.001). All items were rated as very important-particularly regarding cardiac events, nutrition, exercise benefits, medications, symptom response, risk factor control, and CR-but more so in high-income countries in the Americas and Western Pacific. Knowledge sufficiency ranged from 30.0 to 67.4%, varying by region and income class. Ratings were highest for medications and lowest for support groups, resistance training, and alternative medicine. CONCLUSION: Identification of information needs using the valid and reliable INCR-S can inform educational approaches to optimize patients' health outcomes across the globe.

Patients need information to manage their heart diseases, such as what to do if they have chest pain, what a heart attack is, and how to take their medicine to lower the chances they will have another one, so a study of the information needs of over 1600 heart patients from around the globe was undertaken for the first time. Using the Information Needs in Cardiac Rehabilitation short version (INCR-S) scale­which was shown to be a good measurement tool through the study and hence may improve patient education­patients reported they most wanted information about heart events, heart-healthy eating, exercise benefits, their pills, symptom response, risk factor control, and cardiac rehabilitation­but more so in high-income countries in the Americas and Western Pacific. Knowledge sufficiency ratings for each item ranged from 30.0 to 67.4%, also varying by region and income class; perceived knowledge sufficiency ratings were highest for medications and lowest for support groups, resistance training, and alternative medicine.

Women's Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers: Results of the International Council of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation's First Global Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs are underutilized globally, especially by women. In this study we investigated sex differences in CR barriers across all world regions, to our knowledge for the first time, the characteristics associated with greater barriers in women, and women's greatest barriers according to enrollment status. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, the English, Simplified Chinese, Arabic, Portuguese, or Korean versions of the Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale was administered to CR-indicated patients globally via Qualtrics from October 2021 to March 2023. Members of the International Council of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation community facilitated participant recruitment. Mitigation strategies were provided and rated. RESULTS: Participants were 2163 patients from 16 countries across all 6 World Health Organization regions; 916 (42.3%) were women. Women did not report significantly greater total barriers overall, but did in 2 regions (Americas, Western Pacific) and men in 1 (Eastern Mediterranean; all P < 0.001). Women's barriers were greatest in the Western Pacific (2.6 ± 0.4/5) and South East Asian (2.5 ± 0.9) regions (P < 0.001), with lack of CR awareness as the greatest barrier in both. Women who were unemployed reported significantly greater barriers than those not (P < 0.001). Among nonenrolled referred women, the greatest barriers were not knowing about CR, not being contacted by the program, cost, and finding exercise tiring or painful. Among enrolled women, the greatest barriers to session adherence were distance, transportation, and family responsibilities. Mitigation strategies were rated as very helpful (4.2 ± 0.7/5). CONCLUSIONS: CR barriers-men's and women's-vary significantly according to region, necessitating tailored approaches to mitigation. Efforts should be made to mitigate unemployed women's barriers in particular.

Analytical performance validation of a coronary heart disease risk assessment multi-analyte proteomic test.

BACKGROUND: Coronary heart disease (CHD) remains prevalent despite efforts to improve CHD risk assessment. The authors developed a multi-analyte immunoassay-based CHD risk assessment (CHDRA) algorithm, clinically validated in a multicenter study, to improve CHDRA in intermediate risk individuals. OBJECTIVE: Clinical laboratory validation of the CHDRA biomarker assays' analytical performance. METHODS: Multiplexed immunoassay panels developed for the seven CHDRA assays were evaluated with donor sera in a clinical laboratory. Specificity, sensitivity, interfering substances and reproducibility of the CHDRA assays, along with the effects of pre-analytical specimen processing, were evaluated. RESULTS: Analytical measurements of the CHDRA panel proteins (CTACK, Eotaxin, Fas Ligand, HGF, IL-16, MCP-3 and sFas) exhibited acceptable accuracy (80 - 120%), cross-reactivity (< 1%), interference (< 30% at high concentrations of bilirubin, lipids, hemoglobin and HAMA), sensitivity and reproducibility (< 20% CV across multiple runs, operators and instruments). Recoveries from donor sera subjected to typical clinical laboratory pre-analytical conditions were within 80 - 120%. The pre-analytical variables did not substantively impact the CHDRA scores. CONCLUSIONS: The CHDRA panel analytical validation in a clinical laboratory meets or exceeds the specifications established during the clinical utility studies. Risk score reproducibility across multiple test scenarios suggests the assays are not susceptible to clinical laboratory pre-analytical and analytical variation.