Comparing the Efficacy of Home-Based Versus Center-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation on the Risk Factors for Cardiovascular Disease, Quality of Life and Adherence to Treatment: Double-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial

Background: This study was conducted to investigate the efficacy of home-based versus center-based cardiac rehabilitation on the risk factors for cardiovascular disease, quality of life and adherence to treatment. Methods: Sixty-five patients were randomly assigned into the home-based group or the clinic-based group. A 3-month rehabilitation course was designed for patient in each session based on the AACVPR guidelines. Cardiac biomarkers, quality of life (using the SF-36 questionnaire), and treatment adherence (through a questionnaire) were evaluated at the beginning and end of the study for each patient. In both groups, data were compared before and after the rehabilitation, and the data between the two groups were also compared. Results: In this study, the home group achieved significantly higher scores in three aspects of treatment adherence compared to the clinic group (p<0.01). The clinic group scored significantly higher in the social functioning domain of the quality-of-life measure compared to the home group (p=0.03). Additionally, the clinic group exhibited a lower average serum cholesterol level than the home group after rehabilitation (p=0.001). Conclusion: Although the clinic group demonstrated better results in some quality-of-life domains and lower serum cholesterol post-rehabilitation, the home-based rehabilitation may offer benefits in terms of treatment adherence. Therefore, it seems that home-based rehabilitation can be considered a viable alternative for patients unable to attend center-based programs, particularly for those who prioritize convenience and adherence, but further research is needed to explore its impact on cardiovascular risk factors like blood pressure.