↓ Skip to main content

Michigan Publishing

Association Between Cardiac Rehabilitation Participation and Health Status Outcomes After Acute Myocardial Infarction

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Cardiology, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (84th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
11 news outlets
twitter
158 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
73 Mendeley
Title
Association Between Cardiac Rehabilitation Participation and Health Status Outcomes After Acute Myocardial Infarction
Published in
JAMA Cardiology, December 2016
DOI 10.1001/jamacardio.2016.3458
Pubmed ID
Authors

Faraz Kureshi, Kevin F. Kennedy, Philip G. Jones, Randal J. Thomas, Suzanne V. Arnold, Praneet Sharma, Timothy Fendler, Donna M. Buchanan, Mohammed Qintar, P. Michael Ho, Brahmajee K. Nallamothu, Neil B. Oldridge, John A. Spertus

Abstract

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) improves survival after acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and referral to CR has been introduced as a performance measure of high-quality care. The association of participation in CR with patients' health status (eg, quality of life, symptoms, and functional status) is poorly defined. To examine the association of participation in CR with health status outcomes after AMI. A retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients enrolled in 2 AMI registries: PREMIER, from January 1, 2003, to June 28, 2004, and TRIUMPH, from April 11, 2005, to December 31, 2008. The analytic cohort was restricted to 4929 patients with data available on baseline health status, 6- or 12- month follow-up health status, and participation in CR. Data analysis was performed from 2014 to 2015. Participation in at least 1 CR session within 6 months of hospital discharge. Patient health status was quantified using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) and the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12). The primary outcomes of interest were the mean differences in SAQ domain scores during the 12 months after AMI between patients who did and did not participate in CR. Secondary outcomes were the mean differences in the SF-12 summary scores and all-cause mortality. After successfully matching the cohorts of the 4929 patients (3328 men and 1601 women; mean [SD] age, 60.0 [12.2] years) for the propensity to participate in CR and comparing the groups using linear, mixed-effects models, mean differences in the SAQ and SF-12 domain scores were similar at 6 and 12 months between the 2012 patients participating in CR (3 were unable to be matched) and the 2894 who did not participate (20 were unable to be matched). At 6 months, the mean difference was -0.76 (95% CI, -2.05 to 0.52) for the SAQ quality of life score, -1.53 (95% CI, -2.57 to -0.49) for the SAQ angina frequency score, 0.38 (95% CI, -0.51 to 1.27) for the SAQ treatment satisfaction score, -0.42 (95% CI, -1.65 to 0.79) for the SAQ physical limitation score, 0.50 (95% CI, -0.22 to 1.22) for the SF-12 physical component score, and 0.13 (95% CI, -0.53 to 0.79) for the SF-12 mental component score. At 12 months, the mean difference was -0.89 (95% CI, -2.20 to 0.43) for the SAQ quality of life score, -1.05 (95% CI, -2.12 to 0.02) for the SAQ angina frequency score, 0.38 (95% CI, -0.54 to 1.29) for the SAQ treatment satisfaction score, -0.14 (95% CI, -1.41 to 1.14) for the SAQ physical limitation score, 0.17 (95% CI, -0.57 to 0.92) for the SF-12 physical component score, and 0.12 (95% CI, -0.56 to 0.80) for the SF-12 mental component score. In contrast, the hazard rate of all-cause mortality (up to 7 years) associated with participating in CR was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.46-0.75). In a cohort of 4929 patients with AMI, we found that those who did and did not participate in CR had similar reported health status during the year following AMI; however, participation in CR did confer a significant survival benefit. These findings underscore the need for increased use of validated patient-reported outcome measures to further examine if and how health status can be maximized for patients who participate in CR.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 158 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 73 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 73 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 15%
Researcher 8 11%
Student > Bachelor 6 8%
Other 5 7%
Other 17 23%
Unknown 13 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 15 21%
Social Sciences 3 4%
Psychology 3 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Other 8 11%
Unknown 16 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 180. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 January 2020.
All research outputs
#227,629
of 25,732,188 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Cardiology
#205
of 2,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,579
of 418,636 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Cardiology
#12
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,732,188 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,165 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 93.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 418,636 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.