Research ArticleResearchWorkflowPatient Education

Center-based cardiac rehabilitation outperformed home-based care in one trial

Future Cardiology (PubMed)Aug 1, 2026

AI-summarized from the linked source. Educational brief, not medical advice.

Brief summary

A randomized trial of 236 adults with cardiovascular disease in Iran found that both home- and center-based cardiac rehabilitation improved exercise capacity, but center-based rehabilitation produced greater gains and better blood-pressure control at six months.

What NurseJet pulled from the source

Participants completed eight weeks of home-based or center-based rehabilitation, with 107 assigned to home care and 129 to center care. The center group improved more in exercise capacity and systolic and diastolic blood pressure, while lipid, glucose, body-mass-index, and waist outcomes did not differ significantly between groups.

Why this matters for nurses

Cardiac nurses help patients understand rehabilitation options, identify access barriers, and reinforce exercise and risk-factor plans. The findings favor supervised center programs when feasible while supporting an organized home pathway when attendance is not practical.

Bedside takeaway

Center-based rehabilitation produced larger gains, but structured home rehabilitation may preserve access when attendance is difficult.

How This Applies in Practice

Use this when: Preparing a patient with cardiovascular disease for referral to home- or center-based cardiac rehabilitation.

On your shift

Confirm the rehabilitation referral, prescribed setting, exercise parameters, and planned blood-pressure follow-up.
Identify transportation, scheduling, caregiving, cost, mobility, or technology barriers and relay them to the rehabilitation team.
Use teach-back for the activity plan and symptoms that require stopping exercise or seeking urgent evaluation.

Keep in mind: Program structure and patient eligibility may differ from this single trial. Follow the cardiac rehabilitation protocol, facility policy, and provider orders.

Key takeaways

The trial randomized 236 adults with cardiovascular disease to home- or center-based rehabilitation.
Both groups improved exercise capacity during six months of follow-up.
Center-based rehabilitation produced larger exercise-capacity and blood-pressure improvements.
Home-based rehabilitation remained a potentially useful option when center access was limited.

Practice implications

Assess referral status, transportation, work, caregiving, technology, and other barriers before discharge. Reinforce the prescribed rehabilitation setting and exercise limits, confirm blood-pressure follow-up, and use teach-back for symptoms that require stopping activity or seeking care.

Limitations & cautions

The trial was conducted in one national setting, and the abstract does not describe blinding, adherence, crossover, adverse events, or cardiovascular events. Results may not generalize to different rehabilitation programs, patient groups, or health systems.
AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

Citations

Exact source links

Open source

Public citations are filtered to exact credible source pages. Homepage-only or invalid links stay in admin review and are not shown here.

Future Cardiology (PubMed)

Future Cardiology (PubMed). Comparing the effectiveness of home-based and center-based cardiac rehabilitation: a randomized clinical trial.

Open original source

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42538869/

Professional education only

This summary does not replace clinical judgment, facility policy, provider orders, or official guidelines. Verify practice changes against the original source and local protocol.

Related briefs

More updates for this clinical area

Back to Discover

Renal failure (PubMed)Sep 7, 2026Research Article

A single-center retrospective cohort found that approximately one quarter of laboratory-defined acute kidney injury cases on internal medicine wards were not documented, particularly when maximal creatinine was lower.

Med-SurgAI summaryReview source

Research ArticleResearchQuality ImprovementAI summary · original source linked below

Among 161 adult hospitalizations meeting serum-creatinine criteria for acute kidney injury, 39 cases (24.2%) were undocumented. Length of stay and in-hospital mortality did not differ significantly by documentation status.

Key takeaways

In the 149 hospitalizations with a demonstrable creatinine change, 33 cases (22.1%) were undocumented.
Higher maximal creatinine was associated with lower adjusted odds of underdocumentation.
The study did not test whether a detection or documentation intervention improves care or outcomes.

Why this matters on shift

A smaller creatinine rise may receive less attention even when it meets the study's laboratory definition of acute kidney injury, which can affect how renal risk is communicated across the inpatient team.

Bedside takeaway

Trend ordered renal-function results and communicate clinically important changes through local escalation and documentation workflows.

Nursing implications

Trend ordered renal-function results and communicate clinically important changes through the care team according to local escalation and documentation workflows.

Limitations & cautions

Abstract-only summary. This was a retrospective, single-center study of 161 hospitalizations; urine-output criteria and reliable preadmission creatinine values were unavailable, and the reference creatinine method may affect case classification.
AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

Citations · exact source links

Renal failure (PubMed). Underdocumentation of laboratory-defined acute kidney injury in internal medicine wards: a retrospective cohort study.

Open original sourceFull brief

AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

European heart journal (PubMed)Sep 6, 2026Research Article

In the pragmatic TARGET-D randomized trial, vitamin D dosing titrated to a serum target did not significantly reduce the composite of death, recurrent myocardial infarction, heart-failure hospitalization, or stroke after myocardial infarction.

Telemetry Med-SurgAI summaryReview source

Research ArticleResearchMedication SafetyPatient EducationAI summary · original source linked below

Among 630 participants followed for an average of 4.2 years, major cardiovascular events occurred in 15.7% with targeted vitamin D management and 18.4% with usual care (hazard ratio 0.85, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.24; P=0.40).

Key takeaways

At baseline, 87% of participants had a 25-hydroxyvitamin D level of 40 ng/mL or lower.
The primary composite outcome and the individual outcomes of death, heart-failure hospitalization, and stroke were not significantly different.
A lower recurrent-MI rate was a secondary finding and should not override the nonsignificant primary result.

Why this matters on shift

The trial cautions against presenting targeted vitamin D supplementation as a proven strategy for reducing major cardiovascular events after myocardial infarction.

Bedside takeaway

Present vitamin D as prescribed supplementation, not as a replacement for established post-MI secondary prevention.

Nursing implications

Reinforce the prescribed secondary-prevention plan and avoid implying that vitamin D replaces therapies with established post-MI benefit.

Limitations & cautions

Abstract-only summary. The trial included 630 participants, 78.1% were men, the primary confidence interval included benefit and no benefit, and individual secondary outcomes were not the primary endpoint.
AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

Citations · exact source links

European heart journal (PubMed). Targeted vitamin D supplementation and major adverse cardiovascular events after myocardial infarction: the TARGET-D trial.

Open original sourceFull brief

AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

Journal of neurology (PubMed)Sep 6, 2026Systematic Review

A cumulative meta-analysis found longer survival over time in Duchenne muscular dystrophy, alongside a shift from predominantly respiratory toward cardiac causes of death.

Peds ICUAI summaryReview source

Systematic ReviewResearchPatient EducationAI summary · original source linked below

The review included 53 studies and more than 13,000 patients. Pooled median survival was 29 years among ventilated patients and 19 years among non-ventilated patients, but these study-level observational comparisons do not establish that ventilation alone caused the difference.

Key takeaways

Sixty percent of patients in the included studies received home mechanical ventilation.
Survival improved progressively over time in both ventilated and non-ventilated groups.
As respiratory survival improved, cardiac and other causes accounted for a larger share of deaths.

Why this matters on shift

Patients living longer with Duchenne muscular dystrophy may need sustained respiratory support plus ongoing cardiac and multisystem surveillance across care transitions.

Bedside takeaway

Verify each patient's established respiratory and cardiac plan during admissions and care transitions.

Nursing implications

During admissions and handoffs, verify the established ventilation, airway-clearance, and cardiac-monitoring plan and coordinate concerns with the multidisciplinary team.

Limitations & cautions

Abstract-only summary. This was a study-level meta-analysis of heterogeneous observational survival reports; the ventilated and non-ventilated groups were not randomized, so associations should not be interpreted as treatment effects.
AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

Citations · exact source links

Journal of neurology (PubMed). Improving survival in Duchenne muscular dystrophy across eras: a systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis.

Open original sourceFull brief

AI-summarized from the linked source. Review the original article before applying to practice.

How This Applies in Practice

Key takeaways

Practice implications

Limitations & cautions

Exact source links

More updates for this clinical area

One in four laboratory-defined AKI cases went undocumented on medicine wards

Targeted vitamin D did not significantly reduce major cardiovascular events after MI

Duchenne survival has improved as respiratory and cardiac care evolved