Home versus centre exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation after coronary artery bypass grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Xiaoxiao Zheng, Ronglin Liu, Zhouqing Yu et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This systematic review and meta-analysis assessed exercise-based home cardiac rehabilitation (HBCR) versus centre-based rehabilitation (CBCR) or usual care after coronary artery bypass grafting. It included nine randomised trials with 991 participants. For functional capacity, pooled peak oxygen uptake did not differ significantly between HBCR and CBCR (MD = -0.22, 95% CI -1.24 to 0.80; I² = 0%). Anxiety scores favored HBCR over usual care, but heterogeneity was extreme. Depression did not differ significantly, while evidence on health-related quality of life and body composition was too limited for meta-analysis.
Key findings
- Peak oxygen uptake did not differ significantly between HBCR and CBCR (MD = -0.22, 95% CI -1.24 to 0.80; I² = 0%).
- Anxiety favored HBCR over usual care (MD = -2.85, 95% CI -5.05 to -0.65), with extreme heterogeneity (I² = 90%).
- Depression showed no significant difference (MD = -1.83, 95% CI -4.15 to 0.48; I² = 95%).
- Health-related quality of life and body composition were each reported by only two studies and were not meta-analyzed.
Why it matters
The findings suggest that home-based exercise rehabilitation may achieve functional capacity outcomes similar to centre-based programmes after bypass surgery. However, evidence for psychological outcomes and quality of life is less certain. These results help frame the available evidence on rehabilitation delivery options while underscoring that comparisons across settings do not yet establish clear advantages for patient-reported outcomes.
What to keep in mind
The review included only nine trials, and evidence for several outcomes was sparse. Anxiety and depression analyses had substantial heterogeneity, limiting confidence in pooled estimates.