Cited by 737Cardiovascular and exercise physiologyHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementCardiac Health and Mental Health

Effects of Exercise Training on Health Status in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: HF-ACTION Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Flynn, Kathryn E., Piña, Ileana L., Whellan, David J., Lin, Li, Blumenthal, James A., Ellis, Stephen J., Fine, Lawrence J., Howlett, Jonathan G. +8 more·2009·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Findings from previous studies of the effects of exercise training on patient-reported health status have been inconsistent. OBJECTIVE: To test the effects of exercise training on health status among patients with heart failure. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Multicenter, randomized controlled trial among 2331 medically stable outpatients with heart failure with left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less. Patients were randomized from April 2003 through February 2007. INTERVENTIONS: Usual care plus aerobic exercise training (n = 1172), consisting of 36 supervised sessions followed by home-based training, vs usual care alone (n = 1159). Randomization was stratified by heart failure etiology, which was a covariate in all models. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) overall summary scale and key subscales at baseline, every 3 months for 12 months, and annually thereafter for up to 4 years. The KCCQ is scored from 0 to 100 with higher scores corresponding to better health status. Treatment group effects were estimated using linear mixed models according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 2.5 years. At 3 months, usual care plus exercise training led to greater improvement in the KCCQ overall summary score (mean, 5.21; 95% confidence interval, 4.42 to 6.00) compared with usual care alone (3.28; 95% confidence interval, 2.48 to 4.09). The additional 1.93-point increase (95% confidence interval, 0.84 to 3.01) in the exercise training group was statistically significant (P < .001). After 3 months, there were no further significant changes in KCCQ score for either group (P = .85 for the difference between slopes), resulting in a sustained, greater improvement overall for the exercise group (P < .001). Results were similar on the KCCQ subscales, and no subgroup interactions were detected. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise training conferred modest but statistically significant improvements in self-reported health status compared with usual care without training. Improvements occurred early and persisted over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00047437.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2009.457

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Flynn, K. E., Piña, I. L., Whellan, D. J., Lin, L., Blumenthal, J. A., Ellis, S. J., Fine, L. J., Howlett, J. G., Keteyian, S. J., Kitzman, D. W., Kraus, W. E., Miller, N. H., Schulman, K. A., Spertus, J. A., O’Connor, C. M., & Weinfurt, K. P.
Affiliations
  • Duke University (US)
  • Case Western Reserve University (US)
  • Thomas Jefferson University (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Dalhousie University (CA)
  • Henry Ford Health (US)
  • Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • University of Missouri–Kansas City (US)
Venue
JAMA
Published
2009-04-08
Volume
301
Issue
14
Pages
1451
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W1969639902
Cited by
737
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 30 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 61 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 58 · 2014: 46 · 2013: 45 · 2012: 67
FWCI
150.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (R37AG018915)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U01HL063747, U01HL066494, U01HL068980, U01HL064257, U01HL064264, U01HL066482, U01HL066461, U01HL066497, U01HL066491, U01HL066501, U01HL064265, U01HL064250, U01HL068973)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Failure Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
Keywords
chronic heart failure, aerobic exercise training, health status, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, patient-reported outcomes, home-based exercise, supervised exercise, left ventricular ejection fraction, heart failure etiology, sustained improvement
MeSH terms
Aged, Ambulatory Care, Chronic Disease, Exercise Test, Exercise Therapy, Female, Health Status, Heart Failure, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Self Care, Exercise, Treatment Outcome, Sickness Impact Profile

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review