https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1507-876X
![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This study compared characteristics and program utilization in women electing to participate in mixed-sex, women-only, or home-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR). In this retrospective cohort study, electronic records of CR participants in Toronto who were offered the choice of program model between January 2017-February 2020 were analyzed. There were 727 women (74.7% mixed, 22.0% women-only, 3.3% home-based) who initiated CR. There were significantly more women who were not working in women-only than mixed-sex (80.4% vs 64.1%; P = .009). Session adherence was significantly greater with mixed-sex (58.8 ± 28.9% sessions attended/25) than women-only (54.3 ± 26.3% sessions attended/25; P = .046); program completion was significantly lower with home-based (33.3%) than either supervised model (59.7%; P = .035). Participation in women-only CR may be less accessible. Further research is needed to investigate offering remote women-focused sessions or peer support.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank Joan Kitchen, Sylvia Maksymiu, Merrisa Martinuzzi, Dr. Fernando Rivera Theurel, Marcella Calouro, Emily Joseph, Shital Shah, Lauren Jenkinson, Madeleine Flores-Hukom, Karen Dobson, Priscilla Gonsalves, Betty Chau, Holly Wykes, Ray Vickers, and Lucy Moniz, for sharing their expertise regarding model delivery and/or role in delivering women-only CR at the study sites.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Data availability
Due to the nature of this research, participants of this study did not agree for their individual-level data to be shared publicly, so supporting data cannot not be made publicly available. Data are available upon request to the corresponding author by qualified investigators with appropriate approvals.