ICF framework in cardiac rehabilitation: a real-life implementation in post-cardiac surgery and chronic heart failure patients.
Simonetta Scalvini, Adriana Olivares, Anna Giardini and 4 others
PMID 37377129WHAT IT FOUND
Cardiac rehabilitation improved functioning in both post-surgery and chronic heart failure patients, but those with heart failure started with worse body function impairments and made smaller gains than surgery patients.
High comorbidity complexity predicted poorer outcomes at discharge.
Key findings
01Both groups showed global improvement in functioning after rehabilitation, evidenced by a shift toward lower severity impairment ratings.
02Patients with chronic heart failure had significantly worse body function impairments at admission and showed less improvement in functioning compared to post-cardiac surgery patients.
03High comorbidity complexity, kidney failure, and anemia negatively predicted functioning at discharge, while being in the post-cardiac surgery group predicted better outcomes.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
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
The study is retrospective and observational, so it cannot prove that rehabilitation caused the improvements; natural recovery or other concurrent treatments may have contributed. Many patients were excluded due to missing ICF data, and 9 of the original 35 ICF codes were dropped, which may bias the sample toward those with more complete records. The study was conducted at only two centers in Italy, so findings may not generalize to other healthcare systems or populations. Environmental factors and participation codes were not analyzed, limiting the holistic view of functioning.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that the observed improvements were caused solely by the rehabilitation program. As a retrospective observational study, it cannot rule out that natural recovery or other concurrent treatments contributed to the gains, and the exclusion of many patients with missing data may bias the results.