Leizorovicz 1991.

Methods	Study design: Multicentre RCT (4 sites) Country: France Dates patients recruited: February 1981 to May 1984 Maximum follow up: 2 years
Participants	Inclusion criteria: Admitted to participating coronary care units with suspected MI; < 65 years old with typical MI, no major irreversible complication or disability. Exclusion criteria: Contraindication to exercise testing i.e., recent stroke, disability of lower limbs, uncontrolled heart failure, severe rhythm disturbances, SBP > 180 mmHg, severe angina pectoris, or abnormalities triggered by baseline exercise test. N Randomised: total: 182; intervention: 61; comparator (usual care): 60 counselling programme: 61 (no data analysed in this review) Diagnosis (% of pts): MI: 100% Age (mean): intervention: 51; comparator: 49 Percentage male: 100% Ethnicity: NR
Interventions	Intervention: The programme started within a few days of randomisation and included three training sessions a week on a cycloergometer, walking and gymnastics. Components: Exercise and education. Setting: Centre. Aerobic exercise: Modality: cycloergometer, walking and gymnastics. Length of session: 25 min. Frequency: 3 times per week. Intensity: 80% of max HR and then decreased progressively over 2 min (increased as the sessions progressed). Resistance training included? No. Total duration: 6 weeks. Co‐interventions: Also included respiratory physiotherapy, relaxation, recommendations on control of cardiovascular risk factors (smoking habits, diet); recommendations to continue regular physical training at the end of the 6‐week programme. Comparator: Patients in the usual care group were referred to their usual private practioner or cardiologist or both. Co‐interventions: None described.
Outcomes	Non fatal MI, angina, surgery.
Source of funding	Institut National de la Same et de la Recherche Medicale, by the Hospices Civils de Lyon and by the Association pour la Promotion et la Realisation d'Essais Therapeutiques.
Conflicts of interest	NR
Notes	Only 14% of all MI patients admitted to the participating hospitals were randomised to the trial. Exclusion of women and patients > 65 accounted for 60% of exclusions.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported.
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not reported.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Unclear risk	Blinding not described.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	No losses to follow up.
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	All outcomes reported for all time points (although absolute values not always given).
Groups balanced at baseline	Low risk	"Baseline characteristics were identical in the three groups".
Intention‐to‐treat analysis conducted	Low risk	Yes.
Groups received same treatment (apart from the intervention)	High risk	“The rehabilitation programme …. included: three training sessions a week on a cycloergometer; walking; gymnastic and respiratory physiotherapy; relaxation; recommendations on control of cardiovascular risk factors (smoking habits, diet); recommendations to continue regular physical training at the end of the 6‐week programme.” “Patients randomized to CP attended a group session with a cardiologist, a psychiatrist, a nutritionist and a physiotherapist whenever possible......Patients in the UC group were just referred to their usual private practioner and/or cardiologist.”