Cited by 183Cardiac Health and Mental HealthMedical Practices and RehabilitationCardiovascular and exercise physiology

Sex Differences in Cardiac Rehabilitation Adherence: A Meta-analysis

Open access
Oosenbrug, Eric, Marinho, Raquel Pedercini, Zhang, Jie, Marzolini, Susan, Colella, Tracey J.F., Pakosh, Maureen, Grace, Sherry L.·2016·Canadian Journal of Cardiology

Abstract

Background Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) participation is associated with significantly lower mortality, and this benefit has been established as dose-dependent. Because it has been suggested that women are adherent to CR programs less than men, the objective of this study was to review CR adherence among women and men, and to determine whether a sex difference exists. Methods MedLine, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane databases were systematically searched. Titles and abstracts were screened, and selected full-text articles were independently considered on the basis of predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data from included articles were extracted by 2 authors independently and assessed for quality. The meta-analysis was undertaken with predefined subgroup analyses. Results The search identified 5148 articles, of which 149 were fully examined for inclusion consideration. Fourteen studies reporting data on 8176 participants (2234 [27.3%] women) were included. Overall, CR adherence ranged from 36.7% to 84.6% of sessions, with a mean of 66.5 ± 18.2% (median, 72.5%). Men and women enrolled in CR adhered to 68.6% and 64.2% of prescribed sessions, respectively (mean difference = -3.6; 95% confidence interval, -6.9 to -0.3). The sex difference persisted in studies of high quality, that were undertaken in Canada, published since 2010, and where programs were longer than 12 weeks' duration and offered fewer than 3 sessions per week. Conclusions To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis to systematically report CR adherence rates, and results suggest that patients adhere to more than two-thirds of prescribed sessions. CR adherence is significantly lower among women than men. Identified strategies to promote adherence need to be tested among women.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cjca.2016.01.036

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Oosenbrug, E., Marinho, R. P., Zhang, J., Marzolini, S., Colella, T. J. F., Pakosh, M., & Grace, S. L.
Affiliations
  • York University (CA)
  • University Health Network (CA)
Corresponding author
Grace, Sherry L.
Venue
Canadian Journal of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-11
Volume
32
Issue
11
Pages
1316-1324
ISSN
0828-282X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2344390480
Cited by
183
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 4
FWCI
2.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Canadian Journal of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • YorkSpace (York University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Medical Practices and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Complementary and alternative medicine › Cardiovascular and exercise physiology
Keywords
cardiac rehabilitation, medication adherence, sex differences, women, men, session attendance, cardiovascular disease
MeSH terms
Cardiac Rehabilitation, Cardiovascular Diseases, Female, Humans, Male, Patient Compliance, Sex Factors, Secondary Prevention

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