Is 'fast tracking' to Phase IV as effective as standard cardiac rehabilitation?

摘要

The recent study by Robinson et al. [1] investigates a potential solution to the gap that currently exists between evidence and practice in relation to cardiac rehabilitation [2]. As the authors point out, uptake of cardiac rehabilitation consistently falls short of the recommendation that the majority of those at risk of a future cardiac event should attend a formal secondary prevention program [3]. Various systematic reviews [4,5] and individual studies [6-9] have investigated different approaches for the delivery of cardiac rehabilitation that could help address this evidence-practice gap. We commend Robinson et al. for investigating another approach with great potential to reduce the gap. We also commend their strong trial design which scores 8/10 on the PEDro Scale [10] due to the inclusion of features such as intention-to-treat analysis, assessor blinding, excellent follow-up and concealed allocation.