ISBN: Table 76: Clinical evidence summary: Home-based exercise training versus centre-based exercise training Outcomes No of Participants (studies) Follow up Quality of the evidence (GRADE) Relative effect Anticipated absolute effects Risk with centre-based exercise training Risk difference with home-based exercise training (95% CI) All-cause mortality 335 months VERY LOWa,b due to risk of bias, imprecision Peto odds ratio (from 18 fewer to 82 more) Quality of life - SF-36 Physical component summary (PCS) months LOWa due to risk of bias The mean SF-36 PCS in the centre- based exercise training groups was The mean SF-36 PCS in the home-based exercise training groups was (5.45 lower to 4.33 higher) Quality of life - SF-36 Mental component summary (MCS) months VERY LOWa,b,c due to risk of bias, inconsistency, imprecision The mean SF-36 MCS in the centre- based exercise training groups was The mean SF-36 MCS in the home-based exercise training group was (5.74 lower to 7.18 higher) Quality of life EQ-5D utility HIGH f The mean EQ-5D utility in the home- based exercise training group was (0.16 lower to 0.04 higher) Quality of life - MLWHFQ MODERATEb due to imprecision f The mean MLWHFQ in the home-based exercise training group was (17 lower to 9 higher) Exercise capacity - ISWT 30 VERY LOWa,b due to risk of bias, imprecision The mean exercise capacity - ISWT in the centre-based exercise training groups was The mean exercise capacity - ISWT in the home-based exercise training group was (104.42 lower to 116.22 higher) Exercise capacity - 201 e The mean exercise capacity 6MWT in Rehabilitation in chronic heart failure Chronic Heart Failure NICE 2018. All rights reserved. Subject to Notice of rights. 