Skip to main content


Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Table 5 Summary of economic evaluations comparing home-based cardiac rehabilitation (HCR) and no cardiac rehabilitation (No-CR)

From: A systematic review of economic evaluations of cardiac rehabilitation

Author (Year) Perspective Patient populations Study type Currency, price year Findings
Wheeler et al. (2003) Patients/ payers N = 452 women with MI, HF, etc. CCA US dollars, 2000 HCR: 49% lower inpatient cost; 46% fewer inpatient days
Southard et al. (2003) Patients N = 104 MI, CABG, HF CCA/ CBA US dollars, ?year HCR: cost $1,418 less with 213% return on investment
Marchionni et al. (2003) Government or care providers N = 153 MI CCA US dollars, 2000 HCR: $13,246 per patient; better outcomes
      No-CR: $12,433 per patient
Salvetti et al. (2008) Health providers N = 39 CAD CCA US dollars, ?year HCR: $502.71 more per patient
  1. MI, myocardial infarction. HF, heart failure. CABG, coronary artery bypass graft surgery. CAD, coronary artery disease. CCA, cost-consequences analysis. CUA, cost-utility analysis. CBA, cost-benefit analysis.