Table 2.
Characteristics of cardiac rehabilitation programs in the State of Minas Gerais by type of funding (public or private) (n = 19).
| Characteristics/programs | CR program (n) |
|
|---|---|---|
| Public (n = 9) | Private (n = 10) | |
| Personnel available | ||
| Physical therapist | 9 (100.0%) | 10 (100.0%) |
| Nutritionist | 4 (44.4%) | 4 (40.0%) |
| Cardiologist | 3 (33.3%) | 3 (30.0%) |
| Psychologist | 2 (22.2%) | 3 (30.0%) |
| Social worker | 2 (22.2%) | 1 (10.0%) |
| Nurse | 2 (22.2%) | 0 |
| Sport medicine physician | 1 (11.1%) | 1 (10.0%) |
| Physical trainer | 1 (11.1%) | 1 (10.0%) |
| Personnel formally trained in advanced cardiac life support | ||
| All | 3 (33.3%) | 6 (60.0%) |
| Some | 5 (55.5%) | 3 (30.0%) |
| None | 1 (11.1%) | 1 (10.0%) |
| Type of patients | ||
| Postmyocardial infarction | 9 (100.0%) | 10 (100.0%) |
| Post-PCI | 9 (100.0%) | 10 (100.0%) |
| Postcoronary bypass | 9 (100.0%) | 9 (90.0%) |
| With heart failure as the primary diagnosis | 9 (100.0%) | 9 (100.0%) |
| With peripheral artery disease | 8 (88.9%) | 9 (90.0%) |
| With valvular disease | 7 (77.8%) | 9 (90.0%) |
| Postheart transplant | 2 (22.2%) | 4 (40.0%) |
| With syncope as the primary diagnosis | 2 (22.2%) | 3 (30.0%) |
| Other | 2 (22.2%) | 2 (20.0%) |
| Patient risk classifications accepteda | ||
| Without cardiovascular risk | 0 | 3 (30.0%) |
| Low risk | 6 (66.7%) | 9 (90.0%) |
| Moderate risk | 8 (88.9%) | 8 (80.0%) |
| High risk | 5 (55.5%) | 4 (40.0%) |
| Stress tests performed on CR setting | ||
| 6-Min walk test | 7 (77.8%) | 6 (60.0%) |
| Shuttle walking test | 3 (33.3%) | 2 (20.0%) |
| Conventional ergometric test | 3 (33.3%) | 2 (20.0%) |
| Cardiopulmonary test | 1 (11.1%) | 2 (20.0%) |
| Lipids assessment performed on CR setting | ||
| Yes | 1 (11.1%) | 2 (20.0%) |
| No | 7 (77.8%) | 8 (80.0%) |
| Sometimes | 1 (11.1%) | 0 |
| Assessment of metabolic syndrome performed on CR setting | ||
| Yes | 0 | 2 (20.0%) |
| No | 6 (66.7%) | 8 (80.0%) |
| Sometimes | 3 (33.3%) | 0 |
CR, cardiac rehabilitation; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention. No statistically significant differences were found by type of funding using the Chi-square test.
a
Bennett JA, Riegel B, Bittner V, Nichols J. Validity and reliability of the NYHA classes for measuring research outcomes in participants with cardiac disease. Heart Lung. 2002;31(4):262–70.