Objective: To compare a center-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) program with a home-based CR program in terms of improving obesity related index and cardiopulmonary exercise capacity after the completing a phase II CR program.
Methods: In this study, there were seventy-four patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention who were analyzed. Patients with mild to moderate risk (ejection fraction >40%) were included in the group. The patients underwent an exercise tolerance test by measurement of the modified Bruce protocol at three assessment points. Those in the center-based CR group participated in a 4-week training program with electrocardiography monitoring of the patient's progress and results, while those patients who were in the home-based CR group underwent self-exercise training. We measured the obesity related indices such as body mass index, fat free mass index (FFMI), and cardiopulmonary exercise capacity including peak oxygen consumption (VO2max), metabolic equivalents (METs), heart rate, resting systolic blood pressure and the diastolic blood pressure of the participants and noted the results.
Results: Of the 74 patients, 25 and 49 participated in the center-based and home-based CR programs, respectively. Both groups showed significant improvement in VO2max and METs at 1-month and 6-month follow-up. However, FFMI was significantly improved only in the center-based CR group after 1 month of the phase II CR.
Conclusion: Both groups identified in the study showed significant improvement of VO2max and METs at 1-month and 6-month follow-up. However, there was no significant difference in the intergroup analysis. A significant improvement of FFMI was seen only in the center-based CR group after phase II CR.
Keywords: Exercise tolerance; Home care services; Myocardial infarction; Obesity; Rehabilitation.