A search was conducted for randomised trials directly comparing home- with centre-based cardiac rehabilitation for people with heart failure. these are summarised in Table 75 below. Evidence from these studies is summarised in the clinical evidence summary below in Table 76. See also the study selection flow chart in Appendix C, forest plots in Appendix E, study evidence tables in Appendix F, GRADE tables in Appendix H and excluded studies list in Appendix I. All of the studies compared home-based exercise training (which included aerobic circuit training and walking) with centre-based (which included aerobic circuit training, treadmill walking and cycling). Summary of included studies Table 75: Summary of RCTs included in the review Study Intervention and comparison Population Outcomes Comments Cowie (Cowie , Cowie ) Intervention: aerobic circuit (guided by DVD and booklet), 2 weekly phone calls by a physiotherapist; no other treatments reported Frequency: twice per week Duration: 1 hour Intensity: 40-60% heart rate reserve or Borg 12-13, Control: As home but supervised (led by physiotherapist) and hospital-based; no other treatments n = 60 Age (range): 65.8 Gender: 85% male NYHA class II and Mean ejection fraction: NR (systolic dysfunction) Family origin not reported Single centre UK Mortality QoL(MLWHF) Exercise capacity (ISWT) Adherence Maximum duration of follow-up: 2 months The study reported median values only for the outcome QoL (MLWHF), therefore it has not been included in the analysis Daskapan Intervention: Outdoor Walking & n = 29 Mortality Exercise capacity Maximum duration of follow-up: Chronic Heart Failure Rehabilitation in chronic heart failure NICE 2018. All rights reserved. Subject to Notice of rights. 