Heart Rehabilitation for All (HeRTA): Protocol for a feasibility study and pilot randomized trial

Hanne Birke, Ida Foxvig, Karin Burns, Ulla Toft, Anders Blædel Gottlieb Hansen, Pernille Ibsen Hauge, Sussie Foghmar, Rikke Bülow Mindegaard, Louise Meinertz Jakobsen, Hanne Birke, Ida Foxvig, Karin Burns, Ulla Toft, Anders Blædel Gottlieb Hansen, Pernille Ibsen Hauge, Sussie Foghmar, Rikke Bülow Mindegaard, Louise Meinertz Jakobsen

Abstract

Introduction: Today, 50% of people with cardiac disease do not participate in rehabilitation. The HeRTA-study aims to develop and test a sustainable rehabilitation model supporting vulnerable patients in participating in rehabilitation and long-term physical activity.

Methods: A feasibility study with a non-blinded pilot randomized trial was developed in collaboration with partners and cardiac patients to test a multi-component rehabilitation intervention across hospital, municipality, and civil society. The study runs from January 2020 to December 2024. Eligibility criteria for participants: a) diagnosed with either ischemic heart disease, persistent atrial fibrillation, heart failure, or have had cardiac valve surgery, b) residents in Hvidovre Hospitals uptake area, c) cognitively functional, d) physically able to participate in rehabilitation. Patient recruitment will be located at Hvidovre Hospital, Capital Region of Denmark, data collection at Hvidovre Hospital, Rehabilitation Center Albertslund, the Danish Heart Association, and in two municipalities (Hvidovre and Brøndby). Patients in the control group have access to usual care at the hospital: rehabilitation-needs-assessment, patient education, and physical training. After or instead of hospital rehabilitation, the patient can be referred to municipal rehabilitation with patient education, and a total of 12 weeks of physical training across sectors. Patients in the intervention group will in addition to usual care, have access to an information book about cardiac disease, patient supporters from the Danish Heart Association, Information materials to inform employers about the employees' rehabilitation participation, a rehabilitation goal setting plan, a support café for relatives, and follow-up phone calls from physiotherapists 1 and 3 months after rehabilitation to support physical activities. Patients with vulnerabilities will additionally receive patient education conducted in small groups, pro-active counselling by a cardiac nurse, psychologist, or social worker, paid transportation to rehabilitation, and paid membership in a sports association. Patients are computer block-randomized so patients with vulnerability are distributed evenly in the two study arms by stratifying on a) a cut-off score of ≥ 5 in the Tilburg Frailty Indicator questionnaire and/or b) need of language translator support. A power calculation, based on an estimated 20% difference in participation proportion between groups, 80% power, a type 1 error of 5% (two-tailed), results in 91 participants in each study arm. The primary outcome: rehabilitation participation (attending ≥ two activities: patient education, smoking cessation, dietary counseling, and physical training) and reaching at least 50% attendance. Secondary outcomes: health-related quality of life, coping strategies, level of physical activities, and sustainability regarding participation in active communities after rehabilitation. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05104658).

Results: Differences between changes in outcomes between groups will be analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Sensitivity analysis and analysis of the effect of the combined activities will be made. A process evaluation will clarify the implementation of the model, the partnership, and patients' experiences.

Conclusion: Cross-sectoral collaborations between hospitals, municipalities, and organizations in civil society may lead to sustainable and affordable long-term physical activities for persons with chronic illness. The results can lead to improve cross-sectoral collaborations in other locations and patient groups.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1. Time schedule of enrolment, interventions,…
Fig 1. Time schedule of enrolment, interventions, and assessments on participant outcome inspired by the SPIRIT 2013 reporting guidelines [29].
*Rehabilitation needs assessment.
Fig 2. Project organization.
Fig 2. Project organization.
Fig 3. Framework for co-creation and prototyping…
Fig 3. Framework for co-creation and prototyping in a complex intervention.
*Virtual workshop do to Covid-19. **The Cardiac Outpatient Clinic staff were moved to Covid-care (January-April).
Fig 4. Flow chart.
Fig 4. Flow chart.
Fig 5. Overview of the content of…
Fig 5. Overview of the content of the intervention.

References

    1. The World Health Organization. Cardiovascular-disease. [cited 22 Apr 2022].
    1. The World Health Organization. Cardiovascular disease in Europe. [cited 22 Apr 2022].
    1. The Danish Heart Association. Facts about cardiovascular disease in Denmark (in Danish). [cited 22 Apr 2022].
    1. Schiøtz ML, Stockmarr A, Høst D, Glümer C, Frølich A. Social disparities in the prevalence of multimorbidity—A register-based population study. BMC Public Health. 2017;17: 1–11.
    1. Balady GJ, Ades PA, Bittner VA, Franklin BA, Gordon NF, Thomas RJ, et al.. Referral, enrollment, and delivery of cardiac rehabilitation/secondary prevention programs at clinical centers and beyond: A presidential advisory from the american heart association. Circulation. 2011;124: 2951–2960. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0b013e31823b21e2
    1. Davies EJ, Taylor RS, Briscoe S, Lough F, Singh SJ, Mordi IR, et al.. Exercise-based rehabilitation for heart failure. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;27: 1–38. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003331.pub4
    1. Taylor RS, Walker S, Ciani O, Warren F, Smart NA, Piepoli M, et al.. Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for chronic heart failure: The EXTRAMATCH II individual participant data meta-analysis. Health Technol Assess (Rockv). 2019;23: 1–97. doi: 10.3310/hta23250
    1. Lawler PR, Filion KB, Eisenberg MJ. Efficacy of exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation post-myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am Heart J. 2011;162: 571–584.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2011.07.017
    1. Kirolos I, Yakoub D, Pendola F, Picado O, Kirolos A, Levine YC, et al.. Cardiac physiology in post myocardial infarction patients: the effect of cardiac rehabilitation programs—a systematic review and update meta-analysis. Ann Transl Med. 2019;7: 416–416. doi: 10.21037/atm.2019.08.64
    1. Wagner E. Chronic disease management: what will it take to improve care for chronic illness? Eff Clin Pr. 1998;1: 2–4.
    1. The Capital Region of Copenhagen. Cardiac rehabilitering (in Danish). 2019.
    1. Graversen CB, Eichhorst R, Ravn L, Christiansen SSR, Johansen MB L M. Social inequality and barriers to cardiac rehabilitation in the rehab-North register. Scand Cardiovasc J. 2017;51: 316–322. doi: 10.1080/14017431.2017.1385838
    1. Sommer CG, Jørgensen LB, Blume B, Møller T, Skou ST, Harrison A, et al.. Dropout during a 12-week transitional exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation programme: a mixed-methods prospective cohort study. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2021;Jan: 1–10.
    1. Rouleau CR, King-Shier KM, Tomfohr-Madsen LM, Aggarwal SG, Arena R, Campbell TS. A qualitative study exploring factors that influence enrollment in outpatient cardiac rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40: 469–478. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2016.1261417
    1. Al-Sharifi F, Winther Frederiksen H, Knold Rossau H, Norredam M, Zwisler AD. Access to cardiac rehabilitation and the role of language barriers in the provision of cardiac rehabilitation to migrants. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19: 1–8.
    1. Bellmann B, Lin T, Greissinger K, Rottner L, Rillig A, Zimmerling S. The Beneficial Effects of Cardiac Rehabilitation. Cardiol Ther. 2020; 1–4.
    1. Meillier LK, Larsen FB, Nielsen KM, Larsen ML. Socially differentiated cardiac rehabilitation: Can we improve referral, attendance and adherence among patients with first myocardial infarction? Scand J Public Health. 2012;40: 286–293. doi: 10.1177/1403494812443600
    1. Nielsen KM, Faergeman O, Foldspang A, Larsen ML. Cardiac rehabilitation: Health characteristics and socio-economic status among those who do not attend. Eur J Public Health. 2008;18: 479–483. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckn060
    1. Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Mitchie S, Nazareth I, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: The new Medical Research Council guidance. Bmj. 2008;337: 979–983. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1655
    1. Hope Corbin J, Jones J, Barry MM. What makes intersectoral partnerships for health promotion work? A review of the international literature. Health Promot Int. 2018;33: 4–26. doi: 10.1093/heapro/daw061
    1. Jones J, Barry MM. Exploring the relationship between synergy and partnership functioning factors in health promotion partnerships. Health Promot Int. 2011;26: 408–420. doi: 10.1093/heapro/dar002
    1. The World Health Organization. Declaration of Alma-Ata. 1978 [cited 29 Jan 2021].
    1. Skivington K, Matthews L, Simpson SA, Craig P, Baird J, Blazeby JM, et al.. A new framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions: Update of Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2021;374: 1–11. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n2061
    1. Hawkins J, Madden K, Fletcher A, Midgley L, Grant A, Cox G, et al.. Development of a framework for the co-production and prototyping of public health interventions. BMC Public Health. 2017;17: 1–11.
    1. Meroni A, Selloni D, Rossi M, Meroni A, Selloni DRM, Meroni A, et al.. Massive codesign: a proposal for a collaborative design framework. Design International Series. Milano: FrancoAngeli s.r.l., Italy.; 2018.
    1. O’Cathain A, Croot L, Duncan E, Rousseau N, Sworn K, Turner KM, et al.. Guidance on how to develop complex interventions to improve health and healthcare. BMJ Open. 2019;9: 1–9.
    1. Hickey G, Brearley S, Coldham T, Denegri S, Green G, Staniszewska S, et al.. Guidance on co-producing a research project. Nihr Involv. 2018; 1–20.
    1. Egan M, McGill E, Er V, Cummins S, Lock K, Savona N, et al. Guidance on Systems Approaches to Local Public Health Evaluation Part 1: Introducing systems thinking. 2019; 1–19.
    1. Chan AW, Tetzlaff JM, Gøtzsche PC, Altman DG, Mann H, Berlin JA, et al.. SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. BMJ. 2013;346: 1–42. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e7586
    1. The Danish National Committee on Health Research Ethics. The Danish National Committee on Health Research Ethics. 2019 [cited 19 Feb 2019].:
    1. . [cited 1 Dec 2021].
    1. Williams JR. The Declaration of Helsinki and public health. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86: 650–652. doi: 10.2471/blt.08.050955
    1. Vichealth. The partnerships analysis tool. In: [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2 Feb 2021] p. 8.
    1. Det sektorfri Forebyggelseslaboratorium. Et værktøj til partnerskabsanalyse. En ressource til etablering, udvikling og vedligeholdelse af partnerskaber indenfor sundhedsfremme (in Danish). 2020 [cited 11 Feb 2021].
    1. Valentine L, Kroll T, Bruce F, Lim C, Mountain R. Design Thinking for Social Innovation in Health Care. Des J. 2017;20: 755–774. doi: 10.1080/14606925.2017.1372926
    1. Gobbens RJJ, van Assen MALM, Luijkx KG, Wijnen-Sponselee MT, Schols JMGA. The tilburg frailty indicator: Psychometric properties. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2010;11: 344–355. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2009.11.003
    1. Sutton JL, Gould RL, Daley S, Coulson MC, Ward EV., Butler AM, et al.. Psychometric properties of multicomponent tools designed to assess frailty in older adults: A systematic review. BMC Geriatr. 2016;16: 55. doi: 10.1186/s12877-016-0225-2
    1. The Capital Region of Denmark. [cited 1 Feb 2022].
    1. Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap)—A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inf. 2009;42: 377–381. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010
    1. The Danish Data Protection Agency. [cited 7 Mar 2022].
    1. Osborne RH, Elsworth GR, Whitfield K. The Health Education Impact Questionnaire (heiQ): An outcomes and evaluation measure for patient education and self-management interventions for people with chronic conditions. Patient Educ Couns. 2007;66: 192–201. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.12.002
    1. Ware JE; Kosinski M; Keller S. SF-12: how to score the SF-12 physical and mental health summary scales. 4th ed. Boston: Lincoln, R.I.: QualityMetric Inc.; Boston, Mass.: Health Assessment Lab; 2002.
    1. Danquah IH, Petersen CB, Skov SS, Tolstrup JS. Validation of the NPAQ-short—A brief questionnaire to monitor physical activity and compliance with the WHO recommendations. BMC Public Health. 2018;18: 1–10. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5538-y
    1. O’Cathain A, Hoddinott P, Lewin S, Thomas KJ, Young B, Adamson J, et al.. Maximising the impact of qualitative research in feasibility studies for randomised controlled trials: Guidance for researchers. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2015;1: 1–13.
    1. Malterud K. Kvalitative metoder i medicinsk forskning: en innføring (3. edition) (in Norwegian). Oslo: Universitetsforlaget; 2011.
    1. Cornish F, Gillespie AZT. Collaborative Analysis of Qualitative Data. In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis. London: SAGE Public. Ltd.; 2014.
    1. Fridrich A, Jenny GJ, Bauer GF. The Context, Process, and Outcome Evaluation Model for Organisational Health Interventions. Biomed Res Int. 2015; 1–11.
    1. Brazier JE, Roberts J. The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Med Care. 2004;42: 851–859. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000135827.18610.0d
    1. Maruish M, Kosinski M, Bjorner J, Gandek B, Turner-Bowker D, Ware J. User’s Manual for the SF-36v2 Health Survey. Second Edi. Lincoln: Quality Metric Inc.; 2011.
    1. Touray MML. Estimation of Quality-adjusted Life Years alongside clinical trials: the impact of ‘time-effects’ on trial results. J Pharm Heal Serv Res. 2018;9: 109–114. doi: 10.1111/jphs.12218
    1. Statistics Denmark. [cited 1 Aug 2022].
    1. Boaz A, Hanney S, Borst R, O’Shea A, Kok M. How to engage stakeholders in research: Design principles to support improvement. Heal Res Policy Syst. 2018;16: 1–9. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0337-6
    1. Leask CF, Sandlund M, Skelton DA, Altenburg TM, Cardon G, Chinapaw MJM, et al.. Framework, principles and recommendations for utilising participatory methodologies in the co-creation and evaluation of public health interventions. Res Involv Engagem. 2019;5: 1–16.
    1. Lancaster GA, Dodd S, Williamson PR. Design and analysis of pilot studies: Recommendations for good practice. J Eval Clin Pract. 2004;10: 307–312. doi: 10.1111/j.2002.384.doc.x

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다