# Hartrevalidatie en lichamelijke activiteit: systematische review en meta-analyse

*geplaatst 2018-09-01 · Hartfalen · Heart (British Cardiac Society) · doi 10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312832 · https://hartvaat.nl/2018/09/01/hartrevalidatie-en-lichamelijke-activiteit-systematische-review-en-meta-analyse/*

Uitgebreide meta-analyse van hartrevalidatie en lichamelijke activiteit op cardiovasculaire uitkomsten. Referentiedocument voor het hartrevalidatiebeleid.

## English: Cardiac rehabilitation and physical activity: systematic review and meta-analysis.

This meta-analysis evaluated the impact of cardiac rehabilitation on physical activity levels, finding that structured CR programs significantly increase daily activity and exercise capacity. The findings reinforce the importance of exercise-based rehabilitation after cardiac events.

## Abstract (original, from the publication)

OBJECTIVE: To undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the impact of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) on physical activity (PA) levels of patients with heart disease and the methodological quality of these studies. METHODS: Databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, PsychINFO and SportDiscus) were searched without language restriction from inception to January 2017 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing CR to usual care control in adults with heart failure (HF) or coronary heart disease (CHD) and measuring PA subjectively or objectively. The direction of PA difference between CR and control was summarised using vote counting (ie, counting the positive, negative and non-significant results) and meta-analysis. RESULTS: Forty RCTs, (6480 patients: 5825 CHD, 655 HF) were included with 26% (38/145) PA results showing a statistically significant improvement in PA levels with CR compared with control. This pattern of results appeared consistent regardless of type of CR intervention (comprehensive vs exercise-only) or PA measurement (objective vs subjective). Meta-analysis showed PA increases in the metrics of steps/day (1423, 95% CI 757.07 to 2089.43, p<0.0001) and proportion of patients categorised as physically active (relative risk 1.55, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.02, p=0.001). The included trials were at high risk of bias, and the quality of the PA assessment and reporting was relatively poor. CONCLUSION: Overall, there is moderate evidence of an increase in PA with CR participation compared with control. High-quality trials are required, with robust PA measurement and data analysis methods, to assess if CR definitely leads to important improvements in PA.

Auteurs: Grace Olivia Dibben, Hasnain M Dalal, Rod S Taylor, Patrick Doherty, Lars Hermann Tang, Melvyn Hillsdon

---
Bron: Heart (British Cardiac Society), https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312832. Bijgewerkt 2026-07-03T18:38:39Z. Citeer vrij, met bronvermelding en een link naar hartvaat.nl (de url van het record). Samenvattingen zijn redactioneel werk van HartVaat; de oorspronkelijke publicaties blijven van hun uitgevers (doi). Geen medisch advies.