4.5 Review

Factors influencing physical activity after cardiac surgery: An integrative review

期刊

HEART & LUNG
卷 50, 期 1, 页码 136-145

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2020.10.004

关键词

Physical activity; Cardiac surgery; Integrative review; Facilitator; Barrier

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study identified facilitators and barriers influencing physical activity after cardiac surgery, including personal, social, and intervention-related factors. Male gender was the most common predictor of physical activity, while comorbidities were the most frequent barrier. Healthcare providers and exercise guideline developers should take these factors into account when devising strategies for postoperative cardiac patients.
Background: Physical activity can optimize patient outcomes after cardiac surgery, but postoperative patients' physical activity generally has been inadequate. No review studies have focused on factors influencing cardiac patients' postoperative physical activity. Objectives: To identify factors influencing physical activity in patients after cardiac surgery. Methods: This study was conducted following Whittemore and Knafl's methodology. CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsychINFO, Scopus, and Embase were searched and selected studies were analyzed using the Matrix Method. Results: In 12 studies, factors facilitating physical activity included personal, socio-environmental, and intervention-related factors. Barriers to physical activity included personal, socio-environmental, and cardiac rehabilitation program-related factors. The most common predictor of physical activity was male sex, and the most frequent barrier was comorbidities. Conclusions: This study revealed facilitators and barriers that significantly influenced physical activity after cardiac surgery. Healthcare providers and exercise guideline developers should consider our findings when devising physical activity strategies for postoperative cardiac patients. (C) 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据