Analysis of Barriers to Public and Private Cardiac Rehabilitation Programs in Patients with Low and High Adherence.

INTRODUCTION: Participants in cardiac rehabilitation programs have low adherence to their sessions, which makes extremely important to recognize the barriers that cause non-adherence, identifying whether the type of service and level of adherence influence these barriers. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional observational study, in which 220 individuals (66.80±11.59 years) of both genders who are members of public and private exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation programs participated. The volunteers were divided according to the level of adherence, considering patients with low adherence (PLA) those with < 70% of attendance and high adherence (PHA) those with > 70%. Then, initial evaluation, Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale, analysis of socioeconomic level, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Mini-Mental State Examination were applied. RESULTS: Higher total barriers were found in PLA in the public service compared to PHA in the private service (P=0.023). In the subscale "perceived need", PHA in the public service showed higher values than PLA and PHA in the private service (P≤0.001). The "access" barrier was higher for PHA in the public service when compared to PHA in the private service (P=0.024). PHA in the public service exhibited a higher barrier regarding questions about distance, transportation problems, cost, and time constraints. CONCLUSION: The public program presents higher barriers in the questions and categories compared to the private program, mainly the PHA. Furthermore, there are differences in the profile of the participants regarding socioeconomic and anxiety levels, treatment time, ethnicity, and city where they live.

Analysis of Barriers to Public and Private Cardiac Rehabilitation Programs in Patients with Low and High Adherence

ABSTRACT Introduction: Participants in cardiac rehabilitation programs have low adherence to their sessions, which makes extremely important to recognize the barriers that cause non-adherence, identifying whether the type of service and level of adherence influence these barriers. Methods: This is a cross-sectional observational study, in which 220 individuals (66.80±11.59 years) of both genders who are members of public and private exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation programs participated. The volunteers were divided according to the level of adherence, considering patients with low adherence (PLA) those with < 70% of attendance and high adherence (PHA) those with > 70%. Then, initial evaluation, Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale, analysis of socioeconomic level, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Mini-Mental State Examination were applied. Results: Higher total barriers were found in PLA in the public service compared to PHA in the private service (P=0.023). In the subscale "perceived need", PHA in the public service showed higher values than PLA and PHA in the private service (P≤0.001). The "access" barrier was higher for PHA in the public service when compared to PHA in the private service (P=0.024). PHA in the public service exhibited a higher barrier regarding questions about distance, transportation problems, cost, and time constraints. Conclusion: The public program presents higher barriers in the questions and categories compared to the private program, mainly the PHA. Furthermore, there are differences in the profile of the participants regarding socioeconomic and anxiety levels, treatment time, ethnicity, and city where they live.

Publicly versus privately funded cardiac rehabilitation: access and adherence barriers. A cross-sectional study

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) barriers are well-understood in high-resource settings. However, they are under-studied in low-resource settings, where access is even poorer and the context is significantly different, including two-tiered healthcare systems and greater socioeconomic challenges. OBJECTIVE: To investigate differences in characteristics of patients attending publicly versus privately funded CR and their barriers to adherence. DESIGN AND SETTING: Observational, cross-sectional study in public and private CR programs offered in Brazil. METHODS: Patients who had been attending CR for ≥ 3 months were recruited from one publicly and one privately funded CR program. They completed assessments regarding sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and the CR Barriers Scale. RESULTS: From the public program, 74 patients were recruited, and from the private, 100. Participants in the public program had significantly lower educational attainment (P < 0.001) and lower socioeconomic status (P < 0.001). Participants in the private program had more cognitive impairment (P = 0.015), and in the public program more anxiety (P = 0.001) and depressive symptoms (P = 0.008) than their counterparts. Total barriers among public CR participants were significantly higher than those among private CR participants (1.34 ± 0.26 versus 1.23 ± 0.15/5]; P = 0.003), as were scores on 3 out of 5 subscales, namely: comorbidities/functional status (P = 0.027), perceived need (P < 0.001) and access (P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Publicly funded programs need to be tailored to meet their patients' requirements, through consideration of educational and psychosocial matters, and be amenable to mitigation of patient barriers relating to presence of comorbidities and poorer health status.

Publicly versus privately funded cardiac rehabilitation: access and adherence barriers. A cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) barriers are well-understood in high-resource settings. However, they are under-studied in low-resource settings, where access is even poorer and the context is significantly different, including two-tiered healthcare systems and greater socioeconomic challenges. OBJECTIVE: To investigate differences in characteristics of patients attending publicly versus privately funded CR and their barriers to adherence. DESIGN AND SETTING: Observational, cross-sectional study in public and private CR programs offered in Brazil. METHODS: Patients who had been attending CR for ≥ 3 months were recruited from one publicly and one privately funded CR program. They completed assessments regarding sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and the CR Barriers Scale. RESULTS: From the public program, 74 patients were recruited, and from the private, 100. Participants in the public program had significantly lower educational attainment (P < 0.001) and lower socioeconomic status (P < 0.001). Participants in the private program had more cognitive impairment (P = 0.015), and in the public program more anxiety (P = 0.001) and depressive symptoms (P = 0.008) than their counterparts. Total barriers among public CR participants were significantly higher than those among private CR participants (1.34 ± 0.26 versus 1.23 ± 0.15/5]; P = 0.003), as were scores on 3 out of 5 subscales, namely: comorbidities/functional status (P = 0.027), perceived need (P < 0.001) and access (P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Publicly funded programs need to be tailored to meet their patients' requirements, through consideration of educational and psychosocial matters, and be amenable to mitigation of patient barriers relating to presence of comorbidities and poorer health status.

A Randomized, Controlled, Crossover Trial of Virtual Reality in Maintenance Cardiovascular Rehabilitation in a Low-Resource Setting: Impact on Adherence, Motivation, and Engagement.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of adding virtual reality (VR) to maintenance cardiac rehabilitation (CR); it was hypothesized VR would increase adherence, motivation, and engagement. METHODS: This study was a randomized, 1:1 concealed-allocation, single-blinded, 2 parallel-arm, crossover trial. Blinded assessments were undertaken at baseline (midprogram), 12 weeks, and 24 weeks after baseline. The setting was a single CR program of unlimited duration in Brazil. Participants were patients with cardiovascular diseases or risk factors who had been in the program for 3 months or longer. The CR program consisted of 3 supervised exercise sessions per week. In the VR arm, participants had 1 VR session of the 3 per week during the initial 12 weeks of the trial; this was withdrawn the subsequent 12 weeks. Measures were program adherence (% of 3 sessions/week over 12 weeks, ascertained in all participants), motivation (Behavioral Regulation in Exercise Questionnaire 3), and engagement (User Engagement Scale, adapted; vigor, dedication, and absorption subscales); all 3 were primary outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty-one (83.6%) patients were randomly assigned (n = 30 to CR + VR); 54 (88.5%) were retained at 12 and 24 weeks. At baseline, participants had been in CR on average 7 years and had high engagement and motivation. CR + VR resulted in a significant increase in adherence at 12 weeks (baseline = 72.87%; 12 weeks = 82.80%), with significant reductions at 24 weeks when VR was withdrawn (65.48%); in the usual CR care arm, there were no changes over time. There was a significant effect for arm, with significantly higher adherence in the CR + VR arm than usual CR at 12 weeks (73.51%). Motivation decreased significantly from baseline to 12 weeks (4.32 [SD = 0.37] vs 4.02 [SD = 0.76]) and significantly increased from 12 to 24 weeks in the CR + VR arm (4.37 [SD = 0.36]). Absorption was significantly lower at 12 weeks in the CR + VR arm (6.79 [SD = 0.37] vs 6.20 [SD = 1.01]). CONCLUSION: Although VR increased program adherence, interspersing it with usual CR sessions actually decreased patient motivation and absorption. IMPACT: Supplementing a maintenance CR program with VR using "exergames" resulted in significantly greater adherence (8% increase or 3 of 36 sessions), and this was quite a robust effect given it was extinguished with the removal of VR. However, contrary to the hypotheses, offering 1 session of VR per week and 2 of usual CR exercise was related to lower motivation and absorption, which has implications for how clinicians design programs for this patient population.