Background: Psychological interventions in cardiac rehabilitation programs appear relevant in as much they significantly contribute to achieve the goals of rehabilitation, to reduce the risk of relapses and to improve patients’ adherence to therapy. To this aim, motivational interviewing (MI) has shown promising results in improving motivation to change and individuals’ confidence in their ability to do so.Objective: The purpose of this article is to integrate theory with practice by describing a three-session case scenario. It illustrates how MI’s skills and strategies can be used to enhance heart-healthy habits. MI may be synergistic with other treatment approaches and it is used here in conjunction with brief strategic therapy.Conclusion: By the use of MI principles and techniques, the patient reported an increase in his motivation and ability to change, developing a post discharge plan that incorporates self-care behaviors.Clinical Implications: MI may be effective in motivating and facilitating health behavior change among obese patients suffering from heart failure.

Background: Obese patients have myocardial structural and functional alterations related to insulin resistance. Hypothesis: The purpose of the study was to analyze the effects of rosiglitazone, an insulin sensitizer agent, on cardiac morphometry and functioning. Methods: In 2 groups of sex-and age-matched, nondiabetic, obese patients (5 men and 7 women, age 19-51 y; group A: body mass index [BMI] 40.6±3.4 kg/m 2 ; group B: BMI 42.6±2.7 kg/m 2 ), we evaluated the basal insulin sensitivity index (HOMA[IS]), body composition by bioelectrical impedance analysis and 24-h blood pressure monitoring. Furthermore, all patients underwent conventional 2-Dimensional and color Doppler echocardiography, and pulsed-wave tissue Doppler imaging (TDI). After the baseline evaluation, all patients were put on a hypocaloric diet (70% basal metabolic rate) plus placebo if they were in group A, or plus rosiglitazone (4 mg twice daily; Avandia [GlaxoSmithKline plc., Brentford, Middlesex, United Kingdom]) if they were in group B, for 6 mo. Results: Significant decreases in body weight, total fat mass, BMI, and systolic blood pressure were registered in both groups. Rosiglitazone administration appeared more efficient in improving HOMA(IS) (mean difference: 0.30±0.19 versus 0.11±0.21, p<0.05). Left ventricular (LV) diastolic diameter (49.4±7.7 versus 52.3±5.4 mm, p<0.05) and E wave (0.89±0.18 versus 0.99±0.20 m/sec, p<0.05) increased in the rosiglitazone group due to a rise in preload and water content without peripheral edema. The increase in systolic (Sa) wave velocity in both groups was probably a result of the general improvement in insulin metabolism and the decrease in blood pressure. Conclusions: We confirmed the positive effect of rosiglitazone on glucose metabolism in obese, nondiabetic patients, but changes in insulin sensitivity did not explain the cardiac effects produced by further mechanisms.

Aims: The number of elderly patients affected with multiple chronic diseases is constantly increasing. Even though multiple studies demonstrated a beneficial effect of cardiac rehabilitation, we do not have data on the outcomes in elderly patients with obesity and heart disease.Methods: We studied 772 consecutive obese subjects (275 women; 35.6%) aged ≥70 years, affected with coronary artery disease and/or heart failure. We conducted a symptom limited exercise test at the beginning and at the end of the program, which consisted of aerobic and strength physical activity, diet, and psychological counseling.Results: Mean body mass index (BMI) at baseline was 37.6 ± 4.4 kg/m2 and decreased to 36.4 ± 4.3 kg/m2 (P &lt; 0.001). At baseline, attained metabolic equivalents (METs) were 4.7 ± 1.7, and by the end of the program, they were 5.6 ± 2.1 (P &lt; 0.001). The mean improvement was 21.6 ± 21.7% (median, 17.6%; 95% CI, 20.0–23.1%). Patients over 80 years old had similar results compared to the younger ones. Diabetics did worse than non-diabetic patients: the improvement they reached was 19.4 ± 18.9% vs. 23.8 ± 23.9% (P = 0.005). The presence of heart failure was significantly related to both the baseline and final performance, but the attained improvement was significantly greater in heart failure patients: 24.3 ± 23.8% vs. 16.3 ± 15.4% (P &lt; 0.001). No patient had adverse events related to the program.Conclusion: This study documents a significant improvement in exercise capacity in elderly obese patients affected with heart disease who underwent a rehabilitation program.