Barriers and Facilitators to Delivering Inpatient Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Scoping Review

Abstract

Objective

The purpose of this scoping review was to summarize the literature on barriers and facilitators that influence the provision and uptake of inpatient cardiac rehabilitation (ICR).

Methods

A literature search was conducted using PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and AgeLine. Studies were included if they were published in English after the year 2000 and focused on adults who were receiving some form of ICR (eg, exercise counselling and training, education for heart-healthy living). For studies meeting inclusion criteria, descriptive data on authors, year, study design, and intervention type were extracted.

Results

The literature search resulted in a total of 44,331 publications, of which 229 studies met inclusion criteria. ICR programs vary drastically and often focus on promoting physical exercises and patient education. Barriers and facilitators were categorized through patient, provider and system level factors. Individual characteristics and provider knowledge and efficacy were categorized as both barriers and facilitators to ICR delivery and uptake. Team functioning, lack of resources, program coordination, and inconsistencies in evaluation acted as key barriers to ICR delivery and uptake. Key facilitators that influence ICR implementation and engagement include accreditation and professional associations and patient and family-centred practices.

Conclusion

ICR programs can be highly effective at improving health outcomes for those living with CVDs. Our review identified several patient, provider, and system-level considerations that act as barriers and facilitators to ICR delivery and uptake. Future research should explore how to encourage health promotion knowledge amongst ICR staff and patients.

Keywords:

• inpatient
• cardiovascular diseases
• cardiac rehabilitation
• early mobilization
• scoping review

Acknowledgments

We wish to Mr. Henry Lam, academic librarian at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, for his assistance with the literature search.

Disclosure

All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this work.

Additional information

Funding

We wish to acknowledge funding support from the Malcolm Moffat Research Fund at St. John’s Rehab Sunnybrook.