Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 29, 2025

A Novel Digital Platform for a Monitored Home-based Cardiac Rehabilitation Program
Published on: April 19, 2019
Center- vs Home-Based Cardiac Rehabilitation in Patients With Heart Failure: EXIT-HF Randomized Controlled Trial
Cristine Schmidt1, Sandra Magalhães2, Priscilla Gois Basilio3
1Research Center in Physical Activity, Health and Leisure, Faculty of Sport, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal; Laboratory for Integrative and Translational Research in Population Health, Porto, Portugal.
Insights
Home-based cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is as effective as center-based CR for heart failure (HF) patients. This study found similar improvements in peak oxygen uptake, supporting home-based CR as a feasible alternative for improving accessibility.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Rehabilitation Medicine
- Exercise Physiology
Background:
- Cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is evidence-based but underutilized, particularly for heart failure (HF) patients.
- Home-based CR offers improved accessibility for individuals unable to attend center-based programs.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the clinical effectiveness of center-based versus home-based CR in patients with heart failure.
- To assess the noninferiority of home-based CR regarding peak oxygen uptake (Vo2peak).
Main Methods:
- A single-center, parallel-group, noninferiority trial enrolled 120 HF patients.
- Patients were randomized to 12 weeks of either standard center-based CR (24 supervised sessions) or home-based CR (4 supervised sessions + 20 remotely monitored sessions).
- The primary outcome was the change in Vo2peak at 12 weeks, with secondary outcomes including 6-minute walking distance and quality of life scores.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in Vo2peak change was observed between center-based and home-based CR groups (0.8 mL/kg/min; P = 0.10).
- Secondary outcomes, including 6-minute walking distance and Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire scores, also showed no significant between-group differences.
- Exercise adherence was comparable between the two groups (home-based 84% vs. center-based 81%).
Conclusions:
- Home-based CR is noninferior to center-based CR in a contemporary, well-treated HF population.
- The findings support home-based CR as an effective and feasible alternative to traditional center-based programs.
- This approach enhances CR accessibility for heart failure patients.
Background:
Despite being an evidence-based intervention, the implementation of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) is often unsatisfactory, especially among patients with heart failure (HF). Home-based CR can serve as an alternative to improve accessibility for patients unable to participate in center-based programs.
Objectives:
The study sought to compare the clinical impact of center- vs home-based CR in HF patients.
Methods:
Single-center, parallel group, noninferiority trial, enrolling HF patients irrespective of ejection fraction. Patients were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio, then adjusted to a 1 center/2 home ratio during the COVID-19 pandemic, then adjusted to 12 weeks of a standard center-based (24 supervised exercise sessions) or home-based CR (4 supervised sessions plus 20 sessions at home, asynchronously monitored by telephone using wearable smartwatch data) program. The primary outcome was change in peak oxygen uptake (Vo2peak) at 12 weeks.
Results:
Of the 120 patients (age 62 ± 11 years, 66% men, mean left ventricular ejection fraction 36 ± 11%) who were randomized to center-based (n = 45) or home-based (n = 75) CR, 95 (79%) had complete Vo2peak data at the 12-week assessment: 34 (76%) in the center-based group and 61 (81%) in the home-based group. No significant between-group differences were found in Vo2peak change from baseline to week 12 (0.8 mL/kg/min [95% CI: 1.8 to -0.16 mL/kg/min]; P = 0.10). Additionally, no between-group differences were found for changes in the prespecified secondary outcomes: 6-minute walking distance, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire scores, disease-related biomarkers, and physical fitness. Exercise adherence to the CR program was similar between groups (home-based 84% vs center-based 81%).
Conclusions:
In a contemporary well-treated HF population, home-based CR was noninferior to the center-based program, supporting the home-based approach as an effective and feasible alternative to the traditional center-based programs. (EXercise InTervention in Heart Failure [EXIT-HF]; NCT04334603).
More Related Videos
00:07Home-Based Prescribed Pulmonary Exercise in Patients with Stable Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Published on: August 24, 2019
12:45Benefits of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in an Asynchronous Heart Failure Model Induced by Left Bundle Branch Ablation and Rapid Pacing
Published on: December 11, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Restorative Care
Specialized Care Centers and Settings-II
Rural health centers are specialized care facilities in remote locations with very few medical personnel. The primary care providers who run the centers are mostly Registered Nurse Practitioners. Here, emergency treatment is provided to critically ill or injured patients before they are transferred to the closest hospital. Fortunately, due to advancement in technology, many rural healthcare facilities and professionals have easy access to diagnostic and treatment...
Pathophysiology of Heart Failure
Heart Failure Drugs: Inhibitors of Renin-Angiotensin System
Documentation in Long-Term and Home Healthcare Setting
Long-Term Care Facilities
Heart Failure Drugs: β-Blockers