AIMS: Tailored education is recommended for cardiac patients, yet little is known about information needs in areas of the world where it is most needed. This study aims to assess (i) the measurement properties of the Information Needs in Cardiac Rehabilitation short version (INCR-S) scale and (ii) patient's information needs globally. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this cross-sectional study, English, simplified Chinese, Portuguese, or Korean versions of the INCR-S were administered to in- or out-patients via Qualtrics (January 2022-November 2023). Members of the International Council of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation community facilitated recruitment. Importance and knowledge sufficiency of 36 items were rated. Links to evidence-based lay education were provided where warranted. A total of 1601 patients from 19 middle- and high-income countries across the world participated. Structural validity was supported upon factor analysis, with five subscales extracted: symptom response/medication, heart diseases/diagnostic tests/treatments, exercise and return-to-life roles/programmes to support, risk factors, and healthy eating/psychosocial management. Cronbach's alpha was 0.97. Construct validity was supported through significantly higher knowledge sufficiency ratings for all items and information importance ratings for all subscales in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) enrolees vs. non-enrolees (all P < 0.001). All items were rated as very important-particularly regarding cardiac events, nutrition, exercise benefits, medications, symptom response, risk factor control, and CR-but more so in high-income countries in the Americas and Western Pacific. Knowledge sufficiency ranged from 30.0 to 67.4%, varying by region and income class. Ratings were highest for medications and lowest for support groups, resistance training, and alternative medicine. CONCLUSION: Identification of information needs using the valid and reliable INCR-S can inform educational approaches to optimize patients' health outcomes across the globe.
- MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- kardiovaskulární rehabilitace * normy metody MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- nemoci srdce rehabilitace diagnóza psychologie MeSH
- odhad potřeb * MeSH
- průřezové studie MeSH
- průzkumy a dotazníky MeSH
- psychometrie * MeSH
- reprodukovatelnost výsledků MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- vzdělávání pacientů jako téma * MeSH
- zdraví - znalosti, postoje, praxe * MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- multicentrická studie MeSH
- validační studie MeSH
BACKGROUND: Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) programs are underutilized globally, especially by women. In this study we investigated sex differences in CR barriers across all world regions, to our knowledge for the first time, the characteristics associated with greater barriers in women, and women's greatest barriers according to enrollment status. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, the English, Simplified Chinese, Arabic, Portuguese, or Korean versions of the Cardiac Rehabilitation Barriers Scale was administered to CR-indicated patients globally via Qualtrics from October 2021 to March 2023. Members of the International Council of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation community facilitated participant recruitment. Mitigation strategies were provided and rated. RESULTS: Participants were 2163 patients from 16 countries across all 6 World Health Organization regions; 916 (42.3%) were women. Women did not report significantly greater total barriers overall, but did in 2 regions (Americas, Western Pacific) and men in 1 (Eastern Mediterranean; all P < 0.001). Women's barriers were greatest in the Western Pacific (2.6 ± 0.4/5) and South East Asian (2.5 ± 0.9) regions (P < 0.001), with lack of CR awareness as the greatest barrier in both. Women who were unemployed reported significantly greater barriers than those not (P < 0.001). Among nonenrolled referred women, the greatest barriers were not knowing about CR, not being contacted by the program, cost, and finding exercise tiring or painful. Among enrolled women, the greatest barriers to session adherence were distance, transportation, and family responsibilities. Mitigation strategies were rated as very helpful (4.2 ± 0.7/5). CONCLUSIONS: CR barriers-men's and women's-vary significantly according to region, necessitating tailored approaches to mitigation. Efforts should be made to mitigate unemployed women's barriers in particular.
BACKGROUND: The application of rehabilitation robots has grown during the last decade. While meta-analyses have shown beneficial effects of robotic interventions for some patient groups, the evidence is less in others. We established the Advanced Robotic Therapy Integrated Centers (ARTIC) network with the goal of advancing the science and clinical practice of rehabilitation robotics. The investigators hope to exploit variations in practice to learn about current clinical application and outcomes. The aim of this paper is to introduce the ARTIC network to the clinical and research community, present the initial data set and its characteristics and compare the outcome data collected so far with data from prior studies. METHODS: ARTIC is a pragmatic observational study of clinical care. The database includes patients with various neurological and gait deficits who used the driven gait orthosis Lokomat® as part of their treatment. Patient characteristics, diagnosis-specific information, and indicators of impairment severity are collected. Core clinical assessments include the 10-Meter Walk Test and the Goal Attainment Scaling. Data from each Lokomat® training session are automatically collected. RESULTS: At time of analysis, the database contained data collected from 595 patients (cerebral palsy: n = 208; stroke: n = 129; spinal cord injury: n = 93; traumatic brain injury: n = 39; and various other diagnoses: n = 126). At onset, average walking speeds were slow. The training intensity increased from the first to the final therapy session and most patients achieved their goals. CONCLUSIONS: The characteristics of the patients matched epidemiological data for the target populations. When patient characteristics differed from epidemiological data, this was mainly due to the selection criteria used to assess eligibility for Lokomat® training. While patients included in randomized controlled interventional trials have to fulfill many inclusion and exclusion criteria, the only selection criteria applying to patients in the ARTIC database are those required for use of the Lokomat®. We suggest that the ARTIC network offers an opportunity to investigate the clinical application and effectiveness of rehabilitation technologies for various diagnoses. Due to the standardization of assessments and the use of a common technology, this network could serve as a basis for researchers interested in specific interventional studies expanding beyond the Lokomat®.
