Cargando…
Clinical and cost-effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to conventional, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation: Results of the FIT@Home study
AIM: Although cardiac rehabilitation improves physical fitness after a cardiac event, many eligible patients do not participate in cardiac rehabilitation and the beneficial effects of cardiac rehabilitation are often not maintained over time. Home-based training with telemonitoring guidance could im...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5518918/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28534417 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2047487317710803 |
_version_ | 1783251552132136960 |
---|---|
author | Kraal, Jos J Van den Akker-Van Marle, M Elske Abu-Hanna, Ameen Stut, Wim Peek, Niels Kemps, Hareld MC |
author_facet | Kraal, Jos J Van den Akker-Van Marle, M Elske Abu-Hanna, Ameen Stut, Wim Peek, Niels Kemps, Hareld MC |
author_sort | Kraal, Jos J |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: Although cardiac rehabilitation improves physical fitness after a cardiac event, many eligible patients do not participate in cardiac rehabilitation and the beneficial effects of cardiac rehabilitation are often not maintained over time. Home-based training with telemonitoring guidance could improve participation rates and enhance long-term effectiveness. METHODS AND RESULTS: We randomised 90 low-to-moderate cardiac risk patients entering cardiac rehabilitation to three months of either home-based training with telemonitoring guidance or centre-based training. Although training adherence was similar between groups, satisfaction was higher in the home-based group (p = 0.02). Physical fitness improved at discharge (p < 0.01) and at one-year follow-up (p < 0.01) in both groups, without differences between groups (home-based p = 0.31 and centre-based p = 0.87). Physical activity levels did not change during the one-year study period (centre-based p = 0.38, home-based p = 0.80). Healthcare costs were statistically non-significantly lower in the home-based group (€437 per patient, 95% confidence interval –562 to 1436, p = 0.39). From a societal perspective, a statistically non-significant difference of €3160 per patient in favour of the home-based group was found (95% confidence interval –460 to 6780, p = 0.09) and the probability that it was more cost-effective varied between 97% and 75% (willingness-to-pay of €0 and €100,000 per quality-adjusted life-years, respectively). CONCLUSION: We found no differences between home-based training with telemonitoring guidance and centre-based training on physical fitness, physical activity level or health-related quality of life. However, home-based training was associated with a higher patient satisfaction and appears to be more cost-effective than centre-based training. We conclude that home-based training with telemonitoring guidance can be used as an alternative to centre-based training for low-to-moderate cardiac risk patients entering cardiac rehabilitation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5518918 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-55189182017-08-02 Clinical and cost-effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to conventional, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation: Results of the FIT@Home study Kraal, Jos J Van den Akker-Van Marle, M Elske Abu-Hanna, Ameen Stut, Wim Peek, Niels Kemps, Hareld MC Eur J Prev Cardiol Cardiac Rehabilitation AIM: Although cardiac rehabilitation improves physical fitness after a cardiac event, many eligible patients do not participate in cardiac rehabilitation and the beneficial effects of cardiac rehabilitation are often not maintained over time. Home-based training with telemonitoring guidance could improve participation rates and enhance long-term effectiveness. METHODS AND RESULTS: We randomised 90 low-to-moderate cardiac risk patients entering cardiac rehabilitation to three months of either home-based training with telemonitoring guidance or centre-based training. Although training adherence was similar between groups, satisfaction was higher in the home-based group (p = 0.02). Physical fitness improved at discharge (p < 0.01) and at one-year follow-up (p < 0.01) in both groups, without differences between groups (home-based p = 0.31 and centre-based p = 0.87). Physical activity levels did not change during the one-year study period (centre-based p = 0.38, home-based p = 0.80). Healthcare costs were statistically non-significantly lower in the home-based group (€437 per patient, 95% confidence interval –562 to 1436, p = 0.39). From a societal perspective, a statistically non-significant difference of €3160 per patient in favour of the home-based group was found (95% confidence interval –460 to 6780, p = 0.09) and the probability that it was more cost-effective varied between 97% and 75% (willingness-to-pay of €0 and €100,000 per quality-adjusted life-years, respectively). CONCLUSION: We found no differences between home-based training with telemonitoring guidance and centre-based training on physical fitness, physical activity level or health-related quality of life. However, home-based training was associated with a higher patient satisfaction and appears to be more cost-effective than centre-based training. We conclude that home-based training with telemonitoring guidance can be used as an alternative to centre-based training for low-to-moderate cardiac risk patients entering cardiac rehabilitation. SAGE Publications 2017-05-23 2017-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5518918/ /pubmed/28534417 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2047487317710803 Text en © The European Society of Cardiology 2017 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Cardiac Rehabilitation Kraal, Jos J Van den Akker-Van Marle, M Elske Abu-Hanna, Ameen Stut, Wim Peek, Niels Kemps, Hareld MC Clinical and cost-effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to conventional, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation: Results of the FIT@Home study |
title | Clinical and cost-effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to conventional, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation: Results of the FIT@Home study |
title_full | Clinical and cost-effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to conventional, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation: Results of the FIT@Home study |
title_fullStr | Clinical and cost-effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to conventional, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation: Results of the FIT@Home study |
title_full_unstemmed | Clinical and cost-effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to conventional, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation: Results of the FIT@Home study |
title_short | Clinical and cost-effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to conventional, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation: Results of the FIT@Home study |
title_sort | clinical and cost-effectiveness of home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared to conventional, centre-based cardiac rehabilitation: results of the fit@home study |
topic | Cardiac Rehabilitation |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5518918/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28534417 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2047487317710803 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kraaljosj clinicalandcosteffectivenessofhomebasedcardiacrehabilitationcomparedtoconventionalcentrebasedcardiacrehabilitationresultsofthefithomestudy AT vandenakkervanmarlemelske clinicalandcosteffectivenessofhomebasedcardiacrehabilitationcomparedtoconventionalcentrebasedcardiacrehabilitationresultsofthefithomestudy AT abuhannaameen clinicalandcosteffectivenessofhomebasedcardiacrehabilitationcomparedtoconventionalcentrebasedcardiacrehabilitationresultsofthefithomestudy AT stutwim clinicalandcosteffectivenessofhomebasedcardiacrehabilitationcomparedtoconventionalcentrebasedcardiacrehabilitationresultsofthefithomestudy AT peekniels clinicalandcosteffectivenessofhomebasedcardiacrehabilitationcomparedtoconventionalcentrebasedcardiacrehabilitationresultsofthefithomestudy AT kempshareldmc clinicalandcosteffectivenessofhomebasedcardiacrehabilitationcomparedtoconventionalcentrebasedcardiacrehabilitationresultsofthefithomestudy |