Cost-effectiveness of Outpatient Versus Hospital Cardiac Rehabilitation

Overview

The hypothesis is that home based clinical rehabilitation (CR) is less expensive than hospital based CR with similar clinical effectiveness. The investigators will compare the results of two forms of CR on 1. direct and indirect healthcare costs 2. effectiveness on mortality, morbidity, modifiable risk factors control, functional capacity measured by exercise testing, health related quality of life and satisfaction rate 3. cost/effectiveness analysis

The main reasons for patients not to participate in a cardiac rehabilitation program that usually develops by group in the hospital or in a gym, are problems of access to hospital, disgust for participating in a group activity and problems in reconciling their work and / or home with the program schedule. These problems could be overcome by outcome cardiac rehabilitation and thus could increase the number of patients benefit from treatment in either the environment extra or intra-hospital. Low and medium coronary patients sent to cardiac rehabilitation program at our center within the first 12 weeks after presenting with acute coronary syndrome or been revascularized will be included in the study. The prescription of intensity of effort is based on heart rate reached during the stress test for the initial evaluation in all cases, although at home-program heart rate will be monitored using heart rate monitor and / or by the Borg scale. In this way outpatient group patient could performed training sessions individually and at the time of day that best suits their capabilities. The other program components: control of risk factors, health education and counseling will be identical in both groups of patients.

Conditions

Interventions

Eligibility

Locations (1)

Outcomes

Central Contacts