Advertisement

Aging Clinical and Experimental Research

, Volume 31, Issue 2, pp 249–255 | Cite as

Gender differences in home-based cardiac rehabilitation of post-percutaneous coronary intervention patients

  • Yong Hwan Kim
  • Wi-Young SoEmail author
Original Article
  • 86 Downloads

Abstract

Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is a structured program for the prevention of secondary cardiovascular disease (CVD) and related diseases, such as hypertension, diabetes, and obesity. This study aimed to investigate whether there are gender differences after 9 months of home-based cardiac rehabilitation program in post-percutaneous coronary intervention patients. A total of 114 (58.29 ± 10.33 years) men and 30 (60.90 ± 9.32 years) women were enrolled in the CR program. The program included three visits: initial, 4th month (follow-up), and 9th month (final) visits at a CR center. The CR program included exercise and nutrition counseling. In nutrition counseling, a professional nutritionist educated the patients on how to organize the menu, incorporating an optimal caloric, low-salt, and low-cholesterol diet. Exercise was performed 30 min per session for more than 3 days per week with a target heart rate within 40–75% of the peak heart rate-resting heart rate (VO2 reserve; VO2R) during intense exercise, which was based on ECG treadmill test. After 9 months, there was no significant difference in terms of dropout rate between men and women (p < 0.05). No significant changes were found in the anthropometric and lipid profiles in women, whereas the HDL-cholesterol (HDL-C) was significantly increased to 6.8% (p = 0.005) in men. The findings of our study showed that there was no difference in the CR participation rate between men and women. Moreover, there was an increase in HDL-C levels and an improvement in cardiorespiratory endurance, strength, and agility in men, whereas no significant difference in most risk factors and fitness variables was found in women. Thus, the 9-month home-based CR program was more effective for fitness in men, but only the HDL-C showed positive improvement among the cardiovascular risk factors. In women, 6-min walk and timed up and go were effective exercises.

Keywords

Percutaneous coronary intervention Cardiac rehabilitation Gender 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Asan Medical Center (2015-0594) and conducted in accordance with the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Informed consent

Informed consent was provided by all participants.

References

  1. 1.
    Piepoli MF, Corra U, Benzer W et al (2010) Secondary prevention through cardiac rehabilitation: from knowledge to implementation. A position paper from the Cardiac Rehabilitation Section of the European Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabilit 17:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mampuya WM (2012) Cardiac rehabilitation past, present and future: an overview. Cardiovas Diagn Therapy 2:38Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Griffo R, Ambrosetti M, Tramarin R et al (2013) Effective secondary prevention through cardiac rehabilitation after coronary revascularization and predictors of poor adherence to lifestyle modification and medication. Results of the ICAROS Survey. Int J Cardiol 167:1390–1395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Taylor RS, Dalal H, Jolly K et al (2010) Home-based versus centre-based cardiac rehabilitation. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 20:CD007130Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jolly K, Taylor RS, Lip GY et al (2006) Home-based cardiac rehabilitation compared with centre-based rehabilitation and usual care: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol 111:343–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carlson JJ, Johnson JA, Franklin BA et al (2000) Program participation, exercise adherence, cardiovascular outcomes, and program cost of traditional versus modified cardiac rehabilitation. Am J Cardiol 86:17–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Scane K, Alter D, Oh P et al (2012) Adherence to a cardiac rehabilitation home program model of care: a comparison to a well-established traditional on-site supervised program. Appl Physiol Nutr Metabol 37:206–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dunlay SM, Witt BJ, Allison TG et al (2009) Barriers to participation in cardiac rehabilitation. Am Heart J 158:852–859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yohannes AM, Yalfani A, Doherty P et al (2007) Predictors of drop-out from an outpatient cardiac rehabilitation programme. Clin Rehabilit 21:222–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    O’Farrell P, Murray J, Huston P et al (2000) Sex differences in cardiac rehabilitation. Can J Cardiol 16:319–325Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sarrafzadegan N, Rabiei K, Shirani S et al (2007) Drop-out predictors in cardiac rehabilitation programmes and the impact of sex differences among coronary heart disease patients in an Iranian sample: a cohort study. Clin Rehabil 21:362–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    The IPAQ Group (2015) Guidelines for data processing and analysis of the International Physical Activity Questionnaire. http://www.ipaq.ki.se
  13. 13.
    Jelinek HF, Huang ZQ, Khandoker AH et al (2013) Cardiac rehabilitation outcomes following a 6-week program of PCI and CABG Patients. Front Physiol 4:302Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    ACSM (2013) ACSM’s guidelines for exercise testing and prescription 9th. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Balady GJ, Williams MA, Ades PA et al (2007) Core components of cardiac rehabilitation/secondary prevention programs: 2007 update: a scientific statement from the american heart association exercise, cardiac rehabilitation, and prevention committee, the council on clinical cardiology; the councils on cardiovascular nursing, epidemiology and prevention, and nutrition, physical activity, and metabolism; and the american association of cardiovascular and pulmonary rehabilitation. Circulation 115:2675–2682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Heyward VH, Gibson A (2014) Advanced fitness assessment and exercise prescription, 7th edn. Human kinetics, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rikli RE, Jones CJ (2013) Senior fitness test manual. Human Kinetics, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jackson L, Leclerc J, Erskine Y et al (2005) Getting the most out of cardiac rehabilitation: a review of referral and adherence predictors. Heart 91:10–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Marzolini S, Brooks D, Oh PI (2008) Sex differences in completion of a 12-month cardiac rehabilitation programme: an analysis of 5922 women and men. Eur J Cardiovasc Prev Rehabil 15:698–703CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Carmody TP, Senner JW, Malinow MR et al (1980) Physical exercise rehabilitation: long-term dropout rate in cardiac patients. J Behav Med 3:163–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Andrew GM, Oldridge NB, Parker JO et al (1981) Reasons for dropout from exercise programs in post-coronary patients. Med Sci Sports Exerc 13:164–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Heron MP (2015) Deaths:leading causes for 2012. Natl Vital Stat Rep 64:1–93Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shin HY, Lee JY, Song J et al (2014) Cause-of-death statistics in the Republic of Korea. J Korean Med Assoc 59:221–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wittmer M, Volpatti M, Piazzalonga S et al (2012) Expectation, satisfaction, and predictors of dropout in cardiac rehabilitation. Eur J Prev Cardiol 19:1082–1088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Linke SE, Gallo LC, Norman GJ (2011) Attrition and adherence rates of sustained vs. intermittent exercise interventions. Ann Behav Med 42:197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shanmugasegaram S, Oh P, Reid RD et al (2013) Cardiac rehabilitation barriers by rurality and socioeconomic status: a cross-sectional study. Int J Equity Health 12:72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    National Center for Health Statistics (2017) Health, United States, 2015: with special feature on racial and ethnic health disparities. National Center for Health StatisticsGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schoenborn CA, Adams P (2010) Health behaviors of adults: United States, 2005-2007. Vital Health Stat 10:1–132Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Back JH, Lee Y (2011) Gender differences in the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and depressive symptoms in older adults. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 52:e140–e144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sparling P, Cantwell J, Dolan C et al (1990) Strength training in a cardiac rehabilitation program: a six-month follow-up. Arch Phys Med Rehabilit 71:148–152Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Taylor RS, Brown A, Ebrahim S et al (2004) Exercise-based rehabilitation for patients with coronary heart disease: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Med 116:682–692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vilhjalmsson R, Kristjansdottir G (2003) Gender differences in physical activity in older children and adolescents: the central role of organized sport. Soc Sci Med 56:363–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Umberson D (1992) Gender, marital status and the social control of health behavior. Soc Sci Med 34:907–917CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Beauchamp A, Worcester M, Ng A et al (2012) Attendance at cardiac rehabilitation is associated with lower all-cause mortality after 14 years of follow-up. Heart 99:620–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Grace SL, Scholey P, Suskin N et al (2007) A prospective comparison of cardiac rehabilitation enrollment following automatic vs usual referral. J Rehabil Med 39:239–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dalal HM, Zawada A, Jolly K et al (2010) Home based versus centre based cardiac rehabilitation: Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 340:b5631CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ayanian JZ, Epstein AM (1991) Differences in the use of procedures between women and men hospitalized for coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med 325:221–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Clarke KW, Gray D, Keating NA et al (1994) Do women with acute myocardial infarction receive the same treatment as men? Bmj 309:563–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Korea S (2011) Annual report on the cause of death statistics. Statistics Korea, DaejeonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Health and Exercise Science Laboratory, Institute of Sports ScienceSeoul National UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Sports and Health Care Major, College of Humanities and ArtsKorea National University of TransportationChungju-siRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations