YorkSpace has migrated to a new version of its software. Access our Help Resources to learn how to use the refreshed site. Contact diginit@yorku.ca if you have any questions about the migration.
 

A comparison of barriers to use of home versus site-based cardiac rehabilitation

dc.contributor.authorShanmugasegaram, Shamila
dc.contributor.authorOh, Paul
dc.contributor.authorReid, Robert D
dc.contributor.authorMcCumber, Treva
dc.contributor.authorGrace, Sherry L.
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-11T13:05:40Z
dc.date.available2014-06-11T13:05:40Z
dc.date.issued2013-09
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Despite the established benefits of cardiac rehabilitation (CR), it remains significantly underutilized. It is unknown whether patient barriers to enrollment and adherence are addressed by offering choice of program type. The purpose of this study was to examine barriers to participation in CR by program type (site vs. home-based), and the relation of these barriers to degree of program participation and exercise behavior. Method: 1809 cardiac patients from 11 hospitals across Ontario completed a sociodemographic survey in-hospital, and clinical data were extracted from charts. They were mailed a follow-up survey one year later, which included the Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale and the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly. Participants were also asked whether they attended CR, the type of program model attended, and the percentage of prescribed sessions completed. Results: Overall, 939 (51.9%) patients participated in CR, with 96 (10.3%) participating in a home-based program. Home-based participants reported significantly greater CR barriers compared to site-based participants (p<0.001), including distance. Mean barrier scores were significantly and negatively related to session completion and physical activity among site-based (ps<0.05), but not home-based CR participants (p>0.05). Conclusion: The barriers to CR are significantly different among patients attending site vs. home-based program, suggesting appropriate use of alternative models of care. Patient preferences should be considered when allocating patients to program models. Once in CR, programs should work towards identifying and tackling barriers among site-based participants. Abstract word count=231en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThis study was funded by Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada grant #HOA-80676. Ms. Shanmugasegaram is supported in her graduate studies by the CIHR Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada Graduate Scholarship Doctoral Award. In addition, Dr. Grace is supported by CIHR salary award #MSH-80489.
dc.identifier.citationJ Cardiopulm Rehabil Prev. 2013 Sep-Oct;33(5):297-302. doi: 10.1097/HCR.0b013e31829b6e81.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10315/27536
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1097/HCR.0b013e31829b6e81
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherJournal of Cardiopulmonary Rehabilitation and Prevention
dc.rights.journaljournals.lww.com/jcrjournal/pages/default.aspx
dc.titleA comparison of barriers to use of home versus site-based cardiac rehabilitation
dc.typeArticle

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 5 of 5
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
SShan_CRBS by ProgramModel_CRCARE_manuscript_JCRP R&R_2.doc
Size:
69 KB
Format:
Microsoft Word
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
SShan_CRBS by ProgramModel_CRCARE_manuscript_Titlepage.doc
Size:
25 KB
Format:
Microsoft Word
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
SShan_CRBS by ProgramModel_CRCARE_manuscript_Abstract.doc
Size:
23.5 KB
Format:
Microsoft Word
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
SShan_CRBS by ProgramModel_CRCARE_manuscript_Table1_2.doc
Size:
45 KB
Format:
Microsoft Word
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
SShan_CRBS by ProgramModel_CRCARE_manuscript_Table2_2.doc
Size:
41 KB
Format:
Microsoft Word
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.83 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: