视频

Patient Preferences for Cardiac Rehabilitation – A Systematic Review

 

Authors Liu Y , Su M , Lei Y , Tian J , Xue L, Zhang L 

Received 7 October 2022

Accepted for publication 30 November 2022

Published 6 January 2023 Volume 2023:17 Pages 75—88

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S392417

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Johnny Chen

Background: Although a large number of studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation(CR), patient preferences for CR remain unclear. Knowing patient preferences may contribute to increasing patient participation and adherence, thus improving patient prognosis.
Methods: A systematic search was carried out using electronic databases and manual reference checks from inception until 15th June 2022. Quantitative studies, qualitative studies and mixed methods studies assessing patient preferences for CR were included. Two researchers independently conducted study selectionand data extraction. CR preferences were divided into three categories: CR settings, CR components, and CR contents. A narrative synthesis was applied to integrate the results of the included studies. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used to assess the quality of included studies.
Results: Ultimately, 17 publications were included in this study. Regarding CR settings, most patients preferred the hospital to home, some considered both, and a few were willing to accept the local CR club as an alternative setting to the hospital. For CR components, regardless of age and gender, patients considered exercise training and nutrition counseling to be the most important and smoking cessation to be the least important. In exercise intervention of CR contents, progress discussion and encouragement were rated as most critical, and non-conflicting with other activities was rated as least critical. In psychological intervention of CR contents, most patients were willing to accept psychological intervention, and a few patients wanted to heal the trauma with the passage of time.
Conclusion: This systematic review provides important insights into patient preferences for CR, clarifying patient preferences for CR settings, components, and contents, along with possible influencing factors. Patient preferences may change due to the COVID-19 epidemic, and there is still a need to focus on patient preferences for CR and conduct more relevant primary research to validate the findings of this paper in the future.
Keywords: cardiac rehabilitation, patient preference, systematic review, COVID-19