- Design
- Randomised trial, 12-month follow-up analysis
- Population
- Older adults with ischaemic heart disease
- Primary outcome
- Time to first all-cause readmission over 12 months
- Effect
- No significant difference (log-rank p = 0.26)
The RESILIENT trial randomised older adults with ischaemic heart disease to three months of mobile health cardiac rehabilitation or usual care. This follow-up report compared time to first all-cause hospital readmission over 12 months.
There was no significant difference between groups. The published summary is brief and gives no readmission rates or hazard ratio, so the size of any difference, and whether the trial was powered for readmissions, cannot be judged from it.
This report does not show that mobile rehabilitation is ineffective, only that it did not reduce readmissions. Centre-based or home-based cardiac rehabilitation remains worth offering where available. It was published in September 2026.
- Keep referring older adults with ischaemic heart disease to cardiac rehabilitation.
- Do not expect a mobile programme alone to reduce readmissions.
- Choose the format, centre, home or mobile, that the patient will actually complete.
Why it matters
Mobile programmes are often promoted as cheaper substitutes; readmission benefit was not shown.
Don't overread it
The brief report gives no effect sizes, so a small benefit cannot be excluded.
The statistics, in plain English
A log-rank p-value of 0.26 means the difference in time to readmission could easily have arisen by chance. Without event rates or confidence intervals, the size of any true effect is unknown.
Read the rest in the app
You have read your two free briefings this month. The app carries all 27 specialties, every morning, free — and this finding is waiting in it.
Scan to keep reading on your phone. No account needed to start.
Tomorrow morning, before your first patient
One edition a day for geriatrics, written by the desk, every claim tied to its paper. Six minutes.
Get the app — free