Contribution of patient and physician factors to CR referral: A prospective multi-level study

York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Nature Clinical Practice Cardiovascular Medicine (Impact Factor: 7.04). 07/2008; 5(10):653-62. DOI: 10.1038/ncpcardio1272
Source: PubMed


Cardiac rehabilitation (CR), in most developed countries, is a proven means of reducing mortality but it is grossly underutilized owing to factors involving both the health system and patients. These issues have not been investigated concurrently. To this end, we employed a hierarchical design to investigate physician and patient factors that affect verified CR referral.
This study was prospective with a multilevel design. We assessed 1,490 outpatients with coronary artery disease attending 97 cardiology practices. Cardiologists completed a survey about attitudes to CR referral. Outpatients were surveyed prospectively to assess sociodemographic, clinical, behavioral, psychosocial and health system factors that affected CR referral. Responses were analyzed by mixed logistic regression analyses. After 9 months, CR referral was verified at 40 centers.
Health-care providers referred 550 (43.4%) outpatients to CR. Factors affecting verified referral included positive physician perceptions of CR (P = 0.03), short distance to the closest CR site (P = 0.003), the perception of fewer barriers to CR (P < 0.001) and a sense of personal control over their condition by the patient (P = 0.001).
Physician-related and patient-related factors both contribute to CR referral. The most relevant physician perceptions of such programs are program quality and perceived benefit. For patients, the most relevant factors are perceived barriers to CR, which might be conveyed during prereferral discussions. Work to improve physicians' perceptions and patients' understanding might improve use of rehabilitation services.

Download full-text


Available from: Shannon Gravely, Feb 12, 2015
  • Source
    • "The reasons for exclusion included inability to locate the patient (n = 37; 43.0%), patient deceased (n = 24; 27.9%), orthopedic, neuromuscular , cognitive, or vision impairment and nondysphoric psychiatric comorbidities (n = 6; 7.0%), and other reasons such as too ill to participate or moved out of the province/ country (n = 19; 22.1%). Differences in the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the retained and the unretained participants have been reported elsewhere (Grace et al., 2008). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is most often provided in a hospital setting. Home-based models of care have been developed to overcome geographic, among other, barriers in patients at a lower risk. This study assessed whether clinical and geographic factors were related to the use of either a hospital-based or a home-based program. Secondary analysis was undertaken within a study of 1268 cardiac outpatients recruited from 97 cardiologist practices where clinical data were extracted. Participants completed a survey including the Duke Activity Status Index. They reported CR utilization in a second survey mailed 9 months later, including CR site and program model. Geographic information systems were used to determine the distances and the drive times to the CR site attended from patients' homes. Overall, 469 (37.0%) participants attended CR at one of 41 programs. Of the 373 (79.5%) participants with complete geographic data, 43 (11.5%) reported attending home-based CR. The sole clinical difference was in activity status, where patients attending a hospital-based program had lower activity status (P<0.01). There were no differences in model attended on the basis of geographic parameters including urban versus rural dwelling or drive times (P>0.05). In conclusion, only one-tenth of outpatients participated in a home-based program, and this allocation was unrelated to geographic considerations. Although patients should continue to be appropriately triaged on the basis of clinical risk to ensure safety, more targeted allocation of patients to home-based services may be warranted. This may optimize the degree of participation and potentially patient outcomes.
    Full-text · Article · May 2012 · International journal of rehabilitation research. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Rehabilitationsforschung. Revue internationale de recherches de readaptation
  • Source
    • "One study (10%) showed a mixed finding (Brual et al., 2010). Of the five studies that used objective geographic assessment of distance/travel time (Suaya et al., 2007; Higgins et al., 2008; Melville et al., 1999; Grace et al., 2008b; Brual et al., 2010), three studies (60%) found a significant negative association between distance/travel time and CR utilization (Suaya et al., 2007; Higgins et al., 2008; Grace et al., 2008b), while one (20%) study showed null findings (Melville et al., 1999) and one (20%) study showed a mixed findings (Brual et al., 2010). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was to review the current evidence regarding the relationship between geographic indicators and cardiac rehabilitation (CR) utilization among coronary heart disease (CHD) patients. Seventeen articles were identified for inclusion, where nine studies assessed rurality, 10 studies assessed travel time/distance, and two of these studies assessed both. Nine of the 17 studies (52.9%) showed a significant negative relationship between geographic barrier and CR use. Four of the 17 studies (23.5%) showed a null relationship, while four studies (23.5%) showed mixed findings. Inconsistent findings identified appeared to be related to restricted geographic range, regional density, and socioeconomic status. Overall, 52.9% of the identified studies reported a significant negative relationship between geographic indicators and CR utilization. This relationship appeared to be particularly consistent in North American and Australian settings, but somewhat less so in the United Kingdom where there is greater population density and availability of public transport.
    Full-text · Article · Nov 2010 · Health & Place
  • Source
    • "This study represents a secondary analysis of a larger prospective study [20]. Ethics approval was obtained from participating institutions. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A 30 minute drive time threshold has often been cited as indicative of accessible health services. Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a chronic disease management program designed to enhance and maintain cardiovascular health, and geographic barriers to utilization are often cited. The purpose of this study was to empirically test the drive time threshold for CR utilization. A prospective study, using a multi-level design of coronary artery disease outpatients nested within 97 cardiologists. Participants completed a baseline sociodemographic survey, and reported CR referral, enrollment and participation in a second survey 9 months later. CR utilization was verified with CR sites. Geographic information systems were used to generate drive times at 60, 80 and 100% of the speed limit to the closest CR site from participants' homes, to take into consideration various traffic conditions. Bivariate analysis was used to test for differences in CR referral, enrollment and degree of participation by drive time. Logistic regression was used to test drive time increments where significant differences were found. Drive times were generated for 1209 outpatients. Overall, CR referral was verified for 523 (43.3%) outpatients, with verified enrollment for 444 (36.7%) participating in a mean of 86.4 +/- 25.7% of prescribed sessions. There were significant differences in CR referral and enrollment by drive time (ps < .01), but not degree of participation. Logistic regression analysis (ps < .001) revealed that the drive time threshold at 80% of the posted speed limit for physician referral may be 60 minutes (OR = .26, 95% CI: 0.13-0.55), and the threshold for patient CR enrollment may also be 60 minutes (OR = .11, 95% CI: 0.04-0.33). Physicians may be taking geography into consideration when referring patients to CR. Empirical consideration also reveals that patients are significantly less likely to enroll in CR where they must drive 60 minutes or more to the closest program. Once enrolled, distance has no significant effect on degree of participation.
    Full-text · Article · Jun 2010 · International Journal of Health Geographics
Show more