Stern 1983.
Methods |
Study design: 3‐armed RCT Recruitment: 3‐year recruitment period. Recruited from the CCU, internists, and the larger community. MI documented within 6 weeks‐1 year prior to study admission Allocation: not reported Blinding: not reported Randomisation: block randomisation; no method described Follow‐up(s): 3, 6, and 12 months Description: intervention included either supervised exercise or group counselling |
|
Participants |
Baseline characteristics Study participants were predominantly white, married, middle to upper‐middle class men admitted to the study 7 months (mean) after MI Intervention group (counselling)
intervention group (exercise therapy)
Control group (CG)
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Baseline imbalances:
Physically demanding work: unknown Severity of CHD: less severe |
|
Interventions |
Intervention characteristics
Control group
|
|
Outcomes | Proportion at work at 6–12 months (medium term): 12 months Taylor Manifest anxiety, Zung Depression Adverse events (mortality, MI, bypass) |
|
Identification |
Sponsorship source: grant G008003044 from the National Institute of Handicapped Research, Department of Education, Washington DC Country: USA Setting: George Washington University Hospital; single‐centre; outpatient Possible conflicts of interest: no information provided Ethics committee approval: not reported |
|
Notes | ||
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Participants were randomised into 3 study groups in blocks of 6, but the method of sequence generation is not described. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No method of allocation concealment is described. |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | Due to the nature of the interventions examined (supervised exercise training or group counselling), the blinding of study participants and personnel would not have been possible. |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | No blinding of outcome assessors is mentioned and it is unclear if a validated questionnaire was used to assess RTW at the follow‐up. |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | It seems as if no participants were lost to follow‐up for the evaluation of RTW. However, it is unclear if non‐compliant study participants in the intervention groups were excluded from some or all of the outcome assessments. |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Unable to determine, no study protocol was available |
Other bias | Unclear risk | None identified |