Some of the least frequently used referral strategies were perceived as, and are also empirically demonstrated to be, most effective. Broader implementation of these strategies, while better-resourcing CR programs, may improve the continuum of care for cardiac patients.

BackgroundIn 2006, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Access to Care Working Group recommended a 30-day wait time benchmark for cardiac rehabilitation (CR). The objectives of the current study were to: (1) describe cardiac patient perceptions of actual and ideal CR wait times, (2) describe and compare cardiac specialist and CR program perceptions of wait times, as well as whether the recommendations are appropriate and feasible, and (3) investigate actual wait times and factors that CR programs perceive to affect these wait times.MethodsPostal and online surveys to assess perceptions of CR wait times were administered to CR enrollees at intake into 1 of 8 programs, all CCS member cardiac specialists treating patients indicated for CR, and all CR programs listed in Canadian directories. Actual wait times were ascertained from the Canadian Cardiac Rehabilitation Registry. The design was cross-sectional. Responses were described and compared.ResultsResponses were received from 163 CR enrollees, 71 cardiac specialists (9.3% response rate), and 92 CR programs (61.7% response rate). Patients reported that their wait time from hospital discharge to CR initiation was 65.6 ± 88.4 days (median, 42 days), while their ideal median wait time was 28 days. Most patients (91.5%) considered their wait to be acceptable, but ideal wait times varied significantly by the type of cardiac indication for CR. There were significant differences between specialist and program perceptions of the appropriate number of days to wait by most indications, with CR programs perceiving shorter waits as appropriate (p < 0.05). CR programs reported that feasible wait times were significantly longer than what was appropriate for all indications (p < 0.05). They perceived that patient travel and staff capacity were the main factors negatively affecting waits. The median wait time from referral to program initiation was 64 days (mean, 80.0 ± 62.8 days), with no difference in wait by indication.ConclusionsWait times following access to cardiac rehabilitation are prolonged compared with consensus recommendations, and yet are generally acceptable to most patients. Wait times following percutaneous coronary intervention in particular may need to be shortened. Future research is required to provide an evidence base for wait time benchmarks.

Study Design:A systematic review and meta-analysis.Objectives:Pulmonary dysfunction is often advocated among the indications for surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Previous studies have discussed the effect of scoliosis correction on respiratory function without reaching a definitive conclusion: Some showed that the respiratory function can improve after scoliosis surgery without defining the precise role of anterior, posterior, and combined approaches on this improvement; furthermore, the majority of these studies did not take normal growth into account. As a result, the role of surgery remains to be clarified. The object of the present study was to synthesize the current knowledge regarding changes in respiratory function after posterior corrective surgery for AIS.Methods:A comprehensive systematic search was performed to identify all relevant studies in the following electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (EBSCO). We focused on the studies (1) that discussed posterior fusion surgery for AIS without thoracoplasty, (2) that discussed comparisons of pre- and postoperative percent-predicted values of forced vital capacity (%FVC) or forced expiratory volume (%FEV), and (3) with minimum 2-year follow-up. Forest plots were depicted and Z value was calculated as a test for overall effect.Results:Ten studies (6 prospective and 4 retrospective studies) met our inclusion criteria. The overall effect showed that there was no significant difference in %FVC or %FEV between pre- and postoperative measurements (very low evidence).Conclusions:Posterior correction surgery for mild to moderate AIS patients showed no significant improvement of postoperative respiratory function measured by relative, percent-predicted values at minimum 2-year follow-up.

ObjectivesWe sought to describe temporal trends in the sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of participants referred to cardiac rehabilitation (CR), and its effect on programme participation and all-cause mortality over 14 years.SettingA large CR centre in Toronto, Canada.ParticipantsConsecutive patients between 1996 and 2010.Primary and secondary outcome measuresReferrals received were deterministically linked to administrative data, to complement referral form abstraction. Out-of-hospital deaths were identified using vital statistics. Patients were tracked until 2012, and mortality was ascertained. Percentage attendance at prescribed sessions was also assessed.ResultsThere were 29 171 referrals received, of which 28 767 (98.6%) were successfully linked, of whom 22 795 (79.2%) attended an intake assessment. The age of the referred population steadily increased, with more females, less affluent and more single patients referred over time (p<0.001). More patients were referred following percutaneous coronary intervention and less following coronary artery bypass graft surgery (p<0.001). The number of comorbidities decreased (p<0.001). Hypertension increased over time (p<0.001), yet the control of cholesterol steadily improved over time. The proportion of smokers decreased over time (p<0.001). Participation in CR significantly declined, and there were no significant changes in mortality. 3-year mortality rates were less than 5%.ConclusionsCharacteristics of referred patients tended to reflect broader trends in risk factors and cardiovascular disease burden. Physicians appear to be referring more sociodemographically diverse patients to CR; however, programmes may need to better adapt to engage these patients to fully participate. More complex patients should be referred, using explicit criteria-based referral processes.