Background
Scientific background rationale
Objectives
Why this study is necessary
Methods
Study design
Setting and participants
Variables
Survey Development
Survey delivery
Definitions
Measuring program performance level
Data sources/measurement
Quantitative variables
Statistical methods
Results
Enrolments and completions
Telephone versus face to face
Waiting time to commence cardiac rehabilitation
Program length/sessions | Total, n = 23 mean (± SD) | Country n = 15 mean (± SD) | Metro n = 8 mean (± SD) | Telephone N = 1 N | F2F N = 22 mean (± SD) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Length of program(mean/wk) | 7.0 (1.11) | 7.57 (0.75) | 6.0 (0.93) | 7.0 | 7.00 (1.42) |
Sessions per week(mean/wk) | 1.45 (0.50) | 1.43 (0.51) | 1.50 (0.53) | 1.0 | 1.48 (0.51) |
Exercise sessions per week (mean/wk) | 1.47 (0.51) | 1.46 (0.51) | 1.50 (0.53) | 0.0 | 1.47 (0.51) |
Education sessions per week (mean/wk) | 1.07 (0.31) | 0.97 (0.13) | 1.25 (0.46) | 1.0 | 1.10 (0.30) |
Profession | Team member, N = 23 | Country, n = 15 n (%) | Metro = 8 n (%) | Telephone n = 1 n | F2F n = 22 n(%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nurse | 23 | 15 (100) | 8 (100) | 1 | 22 (100) |
Physiotherapist | 20 | 14 (93) | 6(75) | 0 | 20 (90) |
Exercise physiol | 3 | 1 (6.6) | 2(25) | 1 | 2 (9.1) |
Dietician | 20 | 12 (80) | 8(100) | 1 | 19 (86) |
Pharmacist | 19 | 11 (73) | 8(100) | 1 | 18 (81) |
Social worker | 15 | 10 (66) | 5(62) | 1 | 14 (63) |
Psychologist | 3 | 1 (6.6) | 2(25) | 0 | 3 (13.6) |
General practitioner | 2 | 2 (13) | 0 | 0 | 2 (9.1) |
Cardiologist | 4 | 1 (6.6) | 3(37) | 0 | 4 (18.2 |
Profession | Referral pathway to, N = 23 | Country, n = 15 n (%) | Metro, n = 8 n (%) | Telephone N = 1 n | F2F n = 22 n (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nurse | 5 | 4(26) | 2 (25) | 0 | 5 (22.7) |
Physiotherapist | 11 | 9(60) | 2 (25) | 0 | 11 (50) |
Exercise physiology | 7 | 3(20) | 4 (50) | 0 | 7(31.8) |
Dietician | 16 | 10(66) | 6 (75) | 0 | 16 (72.7) |
Pharmacist | 10 | 9(60) | 1 (12.5) | 0 | 10 (45.4) |
Social worker | 11 | 9(60) | 2 (25) | 0 | 11 (50) |
Psychologist | 9 | 4(26) | 5 (62.5) | 0 | 9 (40.9) |
General practitioner | 15 | 10(66) | 5 (62.5) | 0 | 15 (68.1) |
Cardiologist | 7 | 4(26) | 3(37) | 0 | 7 (31.8) |
Primary program coordinator characteristics
Quality indicator (QI) | Total N = 23 n (%) | Country N = 15 n (%) | Metropolitan N = 8 n (%) | Telephone N = 1 y/n | Face to face N = 22 n (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
QI 2.0 | 10 (43.5) | 6 (40.0) | 4(50) | y | 9(40.9) |
QI 3.0 | 21 (91.3) | 14 (93.3) | 7(87.5) | y | 20(90.9) |
QI 4.0 | 22 (95.6) | 15 (100) | 7(87.5) | y | 21(95.4) |
4.1 | 21 (91.3) | 14 (93.3) | 7(87.5) | y | 20(90.9) |
4.2 | 21 (91.3) | 14(93.3) | 7(87.5) | y | 20(90.9) |
QI 5.0 | 23 (100) | 15(100) | 8(100) | y | 22(100) |
5.1 | 21(95.6) | 14(93.3) | 7(87.5) | y | 20(90.9) |
5.2 | 22 (95.6) | 15(100) | 7(87.5) | y | 21(95.4) |
QI 6.0 | 22(95.6) | 14(93.3) | 8(100) | y | 21(95.4) |
6.1 | 17 (73.9) | 12(80) | 5(62.5) | n | 17(77.3) |
QI 7.0 | 21 (91.3) | 13(86.6) | 8(100) | n | 21(95.4) |
7.1 | 21 (91.3) | 13(86.6) | 8(100) | n | 21(95.4) |
QI 8.0 | 5 (21.7) | 4(26.6) | 1(12.5) | n | 5(22.7) |
8.1 | 4 (17.3) | 3(20) | 1(12.5) | n | 4(18.2) |
QI 9.0 | 17 (73.9) | 11(73.3) | 6(75) | n | 17(77.3) |
QI 10.0 | 20 (82.6) | 13(86.6) | 7(87.5) | y | 19(86.3) |
Program Performance
Program performance category | Total N = 23 n (%) | Country n = 15 n (%) | Metro n = 8 n (%) | Telephone n = 1 | Face to face n = 22 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Poor (0–4.5) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Low (5–8.5) | 3 (13.04) | 2 (13.3) | 1(12.5) | 0 | 3 (13.6) |
Medium (9–12.5) | 17 (73.9) | 11 (73.3) | 6 (75.0) | 10.7 | 16 (72.7) |
High (13–16) | 3 (13.04) | 2 (13.3) | 1(12.5) | 0 | 3 (13.6) |