Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreJournal ClubResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeJournal ClubExplore
June 12, 2026European Journal of Preventive CardiologyOpen Access

Risk factor outcomes following flexible delivery models in cardiac rehabilitation: rehabilitation in the real world

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Why the study?

Does virtual case-managed cardiac rehabilitation improve CVD risk factor outcomes compared to supervised cardiac rehabilitation in patients undergoing secondary prevention?

Population

2,484 patients enrolled in cardiac rehabilitation at the University of Ottawa Heart Institute between 2023…

Comparison

Virtual case-managed cardiac rehabilitation vs Supervised cardiac rehabilitation

Design

Cohort

Follow-up

end-of-program (EOP)

Key result

Virtual case-managed cardiac rehabilitation yielded similar improvements in physical activity, functional capacity, and mental health compared to supervised rehabilitation (p=0.068).

Authors

JHJ HarrisCOC D O'neillBQB Quinlan

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

Patient choice of supervised or virtual CR yields comparable risk factor outcomes; leaves open confirmation via randomized trials.

Key Points

  • This study evaluates cardiovascular disease risk factor outcomes across different cardiac rehabilitation program options chosen by patients.
  • Single-centre retrospective cohort study at the University of Ottawa Heart Institute.
  • Patients self-selected between supervised and virtual case-managed cardiac rehabilitation models.
  • Paired samples t-tests and repeated measures ANOVA were used to analyze outcomes from baseline to end-of-program.
  • 1,279 patients in supervised CR and 1,205 in virtual CR; no significant differences in risk factor outcomes (p=0.068).
  • Significant improvements in physical activity (supervised: 195 to 231 min/week; virtual: 191 to 211 min/week, p<0.001) and mental health (p≤0.004).
  • No improvements observed in other risk factors; sex and age affected end-of-program outcomes (p=0.005 and p<0.001, respectively).

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=2,484)

Multicenter

No

Structured PICO

Does virtual case-managed cardiac rehabilitation improve CVD risk factor outcomes compared to supervised cardiac rehabilitation in patients undergoing secondary prevention?

P
Population
2,484 patients enrolled in cardiac rehabilitation at a single Canadian center, self-selecting either supervised or virtual case-managed programs.
E
Exposure
Virtual case-managed cardiac rehabilitation
C
Comparator
Supervised cardiac rehabilitation
O
Outcome
Change in CVD risk factor outcomes (smoking status, physical activity, functional capacity, resting blood pressure, lipids, HbA1c, mental health, and fruit/vegetable intake) from baseline to end-of-program (EOP)surrogate

Main Result

p-value: p=0.068

Virtual case-managed cardiac rehabilitation is as effective as supervised programs in improving physical activity, functional capacity, and mental health, supporting flexible delivery models for secondary prevention.

Cite This Study

Harris et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Cardiovascular disease requiring cardiac rehabilitation (n=2,484). Virtual case-managed cardiac rehabilitation vs. Supervised cardiac rehabilitation was evaluated on Cardiovascular disease risk factor outcomes (baseline vs end-of-program) (p=0.068). Virtual case-managed cardiac rehabilitation yielded similar improvements in physical activity, functional capacity, and mental health compared to supervised rehabilitation (p=0.068).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a2bd1386550ea4541ffe9c7https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjpc/zwag249.227
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Trends in mental health and behavioural risk factors of patients in exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation over 25 years: a retrospective cohort study2026
  2. 2Cardiometabolic profiles of patients enrolled in exercise-based cardiovascular rehabilitation over 25 years: a retrospective cohort study2026
  3. 3Temporal trends in the sociodemographic profile of patients enrolled in cardiovascular rehabilitation over 25 years: a retrospective cohort study2026
  4. 4Physical activity and sedentary behaviour in a phase III cardiac rehabilitation program: identifying vulnerable subgroups2026
  5. 5Effectiveness of comprehensive outpatient cardiac rehabilitation among heart failure patients in a developing country2026