Table 3 Characteristics of studies included on cardiac rehabilitation

Piotrowicz et al.2010 [35]

Prospective randomized trial

152

Aged 58.1 + 10.2 years

Home-based vs SCR

8 weeks after randomization

Warsaw, Poland

Yes

Class II or III

Karapolat et al. 2009 [36]

Randomized control trial

74

Home-based: 45.16 ± 13.58

Hospital-based: 44.05 ± 11.49

Home-based vs hospital-based

8 weeks after randomization

Izmir, Turkey

Yes

Class II or III

Ma et al.2022 [37]

A prospective randomized controlled trial

136

Intervention group: 64.18 ± 8.70

Control group: 63.56 ± 8.29

Home-based vs community Care

24 weeks after randomization

Guangzhou, southern China

Yes

Class I, II and III

Nagatomi et al. 2022 [38]

Single-center, open-label, randomized, controlled trial

30

63.7 ± 10.1 years

Home-based vs standard care

3 months after randomization

Fukuoka, Japan

Yes

Class I, II and III

Chen et al. 2018 [39]

Randomized prospective trial

37

Control group: 60 ± 16

Intervention group: 61 ± 11

Home-based vs standard medical care

3 months after randomization

Taichung, Taiwan

Yes

Not specified

Frost et al. 2019 [40]

Multicenter randomized

controlled trial

216

Intervention group: 69.7 ± 10.9

Control group: 68.5 ± 9.8

REACH-HF + usual Care vs usual Care

12 months after randomization

Four geographical

regions (Birmingham, Cornwall, Gwent and York) across

the UK

Yes

Class II or III

Peng et al. 2018 [41]

Prospective, randomized control trial

98

Years≤60 = 30.6%

Years> 60 = 69.4%

Home-based telehealth exercise training program vs usual care

4 months after randomization

Chengdu, Republic of China

Yes

Class I, II and III

Piotrowicz et al. 2015 [42]

Single-center, prospective, parallel-group, randomized (2:1), controlled trial

111

Intervention group: 54.4 ± 10.9

Control group: 62.1 ± 12.5

Home-based

telemonitored NW vs usual Care

8 weeks after randomization

Warsaw, Poland

Yes

Class II and III

Dalal et al. 2019 [43]

Multicenter, two parallel

group, randomized, superiority trial

216

Intervention group: 69.7 ± 10.9

Control group: 69.9 ± 11

REACH-HF vs usual care

12 months after randomization

Four centers in the United Kingdom

(Birmingham, Cornwall, Gwent and York)

Yes

Class I, II, III and IV

Safiyari-Hafizi et al. 2016 [44]

Randomized control trial

40

< 75 years

HBCR vs usual care

12 weeks after randomization

British Columbia, Canada

Yes

Not specified

Piotrowicz et al. 2019 [45]

Prospective randomized

controlled trial

131

56.4 ± 10.9

Home-based telemonitored cardiac rehabilitation vs standard cardiac rehabilitation

8 weeks after randomization

Warsaw, Poland

Yes

Class II and III