Do heart failure status and psychosocial variables moderate the relationship between leisure time physical activity and mortality risk among patients with a history of myocardial infarction?

Table 1 Hazard ratios (95 % CI’s) for the relationships between leisure time physical activity categories and survival in the post-MI

	Model 1	Model 2	Model 3	Model 4	Model 5
	HR (95 % CI)	HR (95 % CI)	HR (95 % CI)	HR (95 % CI)	HR (95 % CI)
No LTPA (reference)	1	1	1	1	1
Irregular LTPA	0.66 (0.49, 0.90)	0.66 (0.49, 0.90)	0. 76 (0.55, 1.03)	0.69 (0.51, 0.93)	0.79 (0.55, 1.13)
1–150 min	0.49 (0.34, 0.71)	0.49 (0.34, 0.71)	0.64 (0.44, 0.93)	0.52 (0.36, 0.75)	0.53 (0.34, 0.82)
151–300 min	0.30 (0.19, 0.47)	0.33 (0.21, 0.52)	0.40 (0.25, 0.66)	0.33 (0.21, 0.52)	0.39 (0.24, 0.65)
>300 min	0.39 (0.26, 0.58)	0.39 (0.26, 0.58)	0.50 (0.33, 0.76)	0.41 (0.28, 0.61)	0.49 (0.31, 0.76)
p for trend ^a	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01	<0.01

HR hazard ratio, 95%CI 95 % confidence interval, LTPA Leisure time physical activity
Model 1: Basic model, adjusted for age and sex; Model 2: demographic model = Model 1 + adjustments for educational level and occupational status; Model 3: clinical model = Model 1 + adjustments for HF status, having a comorbidity, smoking status and obesity; Model 4: treatment-related model = Model 1 + adjustments for having received cardiac rehabilitation, being prescribed ACE inhibitors, beta blockers, aspirin, and statins; Model 5 : psychosocial model = Model 1 + adjustments for depression and social support
^aBased on Cox regression analyses with LTPA as a continuous variable

ISSN: 1471-2261