%0 Journal Article
%T Benefit of cardiac rehabilitation programme in revascularized coronary patient
%A Laura Cr£¿ciun
%A Claudiu Avram
%A Adina Avram
%A Stela Iurciuc
%J Timisoara Physical Education and Rehabilitation Journal
%D 2009
%I Mirton Publishing
%X Objective: Evaluating the cardiovascular risk profile in revascularized coronary patients at 16 months after revascularization(PCI+CABG). Material and method: We evaluated the cardiovascular risk profile, compliance to the secondary preventionmeasures and reaching guideline targets in revascularized coronary patients included in EuroASpire III Romania. The patientswere divided in two groups: the selection criteria was the adherence to cardiac rehabilitation programme (CRP+/CRP-). Result:The prevelence of cardiovascular risk factors was about 76%, with an increased significance in CRP- group (p<0.05). Theevaluation of lipidic risk factors in the whole lot showed increased values in total cholesterol (182+52.61mg/dl), LDLcholesterol(109.72+44.60mg/dl) and serum triglyceride (163.94+99.98mg/dl). The group with CRP+ registered significantsmaller values of total analised variables compared to those who did not participate in CRP (p<0.05). 31% of integral lotreceived the indication for inclusion in CRP. The total lot compliance was about 19%. Patients in CRP+ group had reached therecommended guideline targets for cardiometabolic and hemodynamic profile in a significant proportion (p<0.05, OR<1). Nosignificant statistic difference was observed between the two groups regarding smoking cessation and the normalizeanthropometric parameters that define obesity (p>0.05, OR>1). Conclusion: At 16 months after revascularisation, the patientsstill present a high risk. The level of cardio-metabolic and hemodynamic risk are maintained the same by unreaching thetargeted values recomended by ESC prevention guideline. The patients in CPR+ group had a significant improvement ofcardiovascular risk factors. Indication but also compliance to structured cardiac rehabilitation programme after myocardialrevascularisation remains at a suboptimal level.
%K cardiac rehabilitation
%K secondary prevention
%K revascularized coronary patient
%U http://www.tperj.ro/en/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Issue_2_Article_8.pdf