RESUMEN
Aims: Improved care has resulted in prolonged survival of patients with congenital heart disease (ConHD), increasing age-related cardiovascular comorbidities. Although cardiovascular rehabilitation (CR) represents evidence-based care for heart failure (HF), the clinical impact of CR in patients with ConHD who developed HF during adulthood is unclear. We investigated 12-month mortality and morbidity in patients with simple ConHD diagnosed with HF with CR versus without CR. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted for the time period February 2004 - February 2024. Utilizing TriNetX, a global federated health research network, a real-world dataset of simple ConHD patients was acquired to compare patients with vs. without (controls) prescription for exercise-based CR. Patients were propensity-score matched for age, sex, ethnicity, comorbidities, procedures, and medication. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, ischemic stroke, and acute coronary syndrome (major adverse cardiovascular events; MACE) within 12 months. Results: Following propensity score matching, the total cohort consisted of 6,866 simple ConHD patients with HF. CR was associated with significantly lower odds for MACE (odds ratio (OR) 0.61 [95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.54-0.69]) and its individual components all-cause mortality (OR 0.40 [95 % CI 0.33-0.47]) and ischemic stroke (OR 0.75 [95 % CI 0.64-0.88]), but not acute coronary syndrome (OR 1.24 [95 % CI 0.91-1.69]). Conclusion: CR was associated with significantly lower 12-month MACE in patients with simple ConHD with concomitant HF compared to usual care.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: UK exercise referral schemes (ERSs) have been criticised for focusing too much on exercise prescription and not enough on sustainable physical activity (PA) behaviour change. Previously, a theoretically grounded intervention (coproduced PA referral scheme, Co-PARS) was coproduced to support long-term PA behaviour change in individuals with health conditions. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of Co-PARS compared with a usual care ERS and no treatment for increasing cardiorespiratory fitness. DESIGN: A three-arm quasi-experimental trial. SETTING: Two leisure centres providing (1) Co-PARS, (2) usual exercise referral care and one no-treatment control. PARTICIPANTS: 68 adults with lifestyle-related health conditions (eg, cardiovascular, diabetes, depression) were recruited to co-PARS, usual care or no treatment. INTERVENTION: 16-weeks of PA behaviour change support delivered at 4, 8, 12 and 18 weeks, in addition to the usual care 12-week leisure centre access. OUTCOME MEASURES: Cardiorespiratory fitness, vascular health, PA and mental well-being were measured at baseline, 12 weeks and 6 months (PA and mental well-being only). Fitness centre engagement (co-PARS and usual care) and behaviour change consultation attendance (co-PARS) were assessed. Following an intention-to-treat approach, repeated-measures linear mixed models were used to explore intervention effects. RESULTS: Significant improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness (p=0.002) and vascular health (p=0.002) were found in co-PARS compared with usual care and no-treatment at 12 weeks. No significant changes in PA or well-being at 12 weeks or 6 months were noted. Intervention engagement was higher in co-PARS than usual care, though this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: A coproduced PA behaviour change intervention led to promising improvements in cardiorespiratory and vascular health at 12 weeks, despite no effect for PA levels at 12 weeks or 6 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03490747.
