National survey of Australian cardiac rehabilitation programmes: does current exercise programming adhere to evidence-based guidelines and best practice?. Issue 1 (27th February 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hollings, Matthew; Mavros, Yorgi; Freeston, Jonathan; Fiatarone Singh, Maria
• Is Part Of: BMJ open sport & exercise medicine. Volume 9:Issue 1(2023)
• Publication Date: 2023-02-27
• Subjects: Cardiovascular -- Exercise physiology -- Exercise rehabilitation -- Heart disease; Sports medicine -- Periodicals; Exercise therapy -- Periodicals; 617.102705
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjsem-2022-001468
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2055-7647

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: The efficacy of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) for patient outcomes is well established, with better outcomes when delivery meets recommended guidelines. The aim of this study was to assess how well Australian practice aligns with national CR guidelines for exercise assessment and prescription. Method: This cross-sectional online survey was distributed to all 475 publicly listed CR services in Australia and consisted of four sections: (1) Programme and client demographics, (2) aerobic exercise characteristics, (3) resistance exercise characteristics and (4) pre-exercise assessment, exercise testing and progression. Results: In total, 228 (54%) survey responses were received. Only three of five Australian guideline recommendations were consistently reported to be followed in current CR programmes: assessment of physical function prior to exercise (91%), prescription of light-moderate exercise intensity (76%) and review of referring physician results (75%). Remaining guidelines were commonly not implemented. For example, only 58% of services reported an initial assessment of resting ECG/heart rate, and only 58% reported the concurrent prescription of both aerobic and resistance exercise, which may have been influenced by equipment availability (p<0.05). Exercise-specific assessments such as muscular strength (18%) and aerobic fitness (13%) were uncommonly reported, although both were more frequent in metropolitan services (p<0.05) or when an exercise physiologist was present (p<0.05). Conclusions: Clinically relevant deficits in national CR guideline implementation are common, potentially influenced by location, exercise supervisor and equipment availability. Key deficiencies include the lack of concurrent aerobic and resistance exercise prescription and infrequent assessment of important physiological outcomes including resting heart rate, muscular strength and aerobic fitness.