This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

NANETTE K. WENGER, MD; JOSEPH S. ALPERT, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1989;149(7):1504-1506.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

The recent "position paper" of the American College of Physicians¹ and the associated review of the efficacy of cardiac rehabilitation services² provide an excellent summary of selected studies and discussions concerning cardiac rehabilitation. The features and outcomes of clinical trials of exercise training, undertaken predominantly during the last decade, were compared as a basis for providing guidelines for the use of rehabilitative services. However, we were concerned that some pivotal questions were not addressed and that some contemporary issues were not highlighted; thus, a less-than-complete overview of current cardiac rehabilitative practices has been provided for primary care physicians caring for coronary patients and for third-party insurers funding their care.

WHAT ARE APPROPRIATE GOALS OF EXERCISE REHABILITATION FOLLOWING MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION OR MYOCARDIAL REVASCULARIZATION? WHY CAN EXERCISE TRAINING AS AN ISOLATED INTERVENTION NOT BE CONSIDERED SYNONYMOUS WITH CORONARY REHABILITATION?

Most physicians recommend, and most coronary patients undertake, exercise rehabilitation with . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Department of Medicine (Cardiology) Emory University School of Medicine Grady Memorial Hospital 80 Butler St SE Atlanta, GA 30335; Division of Cardiovascular Medicine 55 Lake Ave N Worcester, MA 01655

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?