Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for patients with coronary heart disease: a systematic review and evidence mapping study.
Zijun Li, Ke Guo, Yongqi Yang and 6 others
PMID 38345568WHAT IT FOUND
Across 62 reviews, exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation was reported as beneficial compared with usual care, but evidence quality was low and results were inconsistent.
Key findings
01The included reviews reported benefits of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation compared with usual care, but results for specific outcomes were inconsistent.
02The included reviews were rated as 8 high quality, 13 moderate quality, 20 low quality, and 21 very low quality.
03Five reviews summarized adverse events, but no pooled results were estimated and no significant differences were observed compared with usual care.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Most included reviews were low or very low quality: 20 were low and 21 were very low, so confidence in the mapped evidence is limited. The reviews reported inconsistent results for specific outcomes, and this evidence map did not provide quantitative statistics. The analysis did not account for possible overlap of randomized controlled trials across the included reviews, which could bias the picture of the evidence. The quality of the individual trials inside each review was not assessed. Many reviews used unspecified exercise, and evidence was limited for HIIT, mind-body exercise, women, and older adults. Most reviews came from China (41.9%), which may limit applicability to other settings.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as proof that a specific exercise type works for coronary heart disease. The map found benefits overall, but most reviews were low or very low quality, results were inconsistent, and evidence for HIIT and mind-body exercise was limited.