Dataset Information

Randomized controlled trial of home-based vs. hospital-based pulmonary rehabilitation in post COVID-19 patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Between 30% and 60% of people who have been infected with COVID-19 still had symptoms 3 months after the start of the disease. Prescribing a pulmonary rehabilitation program in rehabilitation facilities for post COVID-19 patients could help alleviate the symptoms. However, rehabilitation facilities known to provide good quality care to COVID-19 patients and all other patients, could become saturated by the rise in cases. Home-based rehabilitation is a potential solution that could be sustainable in the long term to avoid this saturation and/or a very long waiting list for patients.

Aim

The aim of this study was to investigate whether home-based rehabilitation would have similar effects compared to inpatient rehabilitation on physical and respiratory variables in post COVID-19 patients.

Design

This is a randomized controlled trial.

Setting

Pulmonary rehabilitation facility.

Population

Seventeen post COVID-19 patients were randomized into two groups: inpatient pulmonary rehabilitation (IPR) or home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (HPR).

Methods

The comparison of the two rehabilitation methods relied on questionnaires, physical tests and the evaluation of several respiratory parameters. A 2-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures was performed to assess the effects of time (pre- vs. post-rehabilitation), group (IPR vs. HPR) and their interaction for all parameters.

Results

The main result of this study is that distance covered in the 6MWT (6MWD) shows significant improvements, between pre- and postrehabilitation program in both groups (+95 m in IPR group vs.+72 m in HPR group, P<0.001) with no significant interaction between time and group (P=0.420).

Conclusions

These results suggest that home-based pulmonary rehabilitation would be as efficient as IPR to decrease physical sequelae in post COVID-19 patients.

Clinical rehabilitation impact

It is possible to suggest both methods (home-based rehabilitation or inpatient pulmonary rehabilitation) according to the specificities of each patient and depending on hospital saturation. The choice of one or the other method should not be made to the detriment of the patient.

SUBMITTER: Vallier JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10035444 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomized controlled trial of home-based vs. hospital-based pulmonary rehabilitation in post COVID-19 patients.

Vallier Jean-Marc JM Simon Charles C Bronstein Antoine A Dumont Maxence M Jobic Asmaa A Paleiron Nicolas N Mely Laurent L

European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine 20230126 1

<h4>Background</h4>Between 30% and 60% of people who have been infected with COVID-19 still had symptoms 3 months after the start of the disease. Prescribing a pulmonary rehabilitation program in rehabilitation facilities for post COVID-19 patients could help alleviate the symptoms. However, rehabilitation facilities known to provide good quality care to COVID-19 patients and all other patients, could become saturated by the rise in cases. Home-based rehabilitation is a potential solution that c ...[more]

PMID: 36700245

Similar Datasets

Project description:Formal rehabilitation programs are often assumed to be required after total knee arthroplasty to optimize patient recovery. Inpatient rehabilitation is a costly rehabilitation option after total knee arthroplasty and, in Australia, is utilized most frequently for privately insured patients. With the exception of comparisons with domiciliary services, no randomized trial has compared inpatient rehabilitation to any outpatient based program. The Hospital Inpatient versus HOme (HIHO) study primarily aims to determine whether 10 days of post-acute inpatient rehabilitation followed by a hybrid home program provides superior recovery of functional mobility on the 6-minute walk test (6MWT) compared to a hybrid home program alone following total knee arthroplasty. Secondarily, the trial aims to determine whether inpatient rehabilitation yields superior recovery in patient-reported function.This is a two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial (RCT), with a third, non-randomized, observational group. One hundred and forty eligible, consenting participants who have undergone a primary total knee arthroplasty at a high-volume joint replacement center will be randomly allocated when cleared for discharge from acute care to either 10 days of inpatient rehabilitation followed by usual care (a 6-week hybrid home program) or to usual care. Seventy participants in each group (140 in total) will provide 80% power at a significance level of 5% to detect an increase in walking capacity from 400 m to 460 m between the Home and Inpatient groups, respectively, in the 6MWT at 6 months post-surgery, assuming a SD of 120 m and a drop-out rate of <10%.The outcome assessor will assess participants at 10, 26 and 52 weeks post-operatively, and will remain blind to group allocation for the duration of the study, as will the statistician. Participant preference for rehabilitation mode stated prior to randomization will be accounted for in the analysis together with any baseline differences in potentially confounding characteristics as required.The HIHO Trial will be the first RCT to investigate the efficacy of inpatient rehabilitation compared to any outpatient alternative following total knee arthroplasty.U.S. National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry (http://clinicaltrials.gov) ref: NCT01583153.

Project description:The use of noninvasive intermittent positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients with chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure remains controversial as long-term data are almost lacking. The aim was to compare the outcome of 2-year home-based nocturnal NIPPV in addition to rehabilitation (NIPPV + PR) with rehabilitation alone (PR) in COPD patients with chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure.Sixty-six patients could be analyzed for the two-year home-based follow-up period. Differences in change between the NIPPV + PR and PR group were assessed by a linear mixed effects model with a random effect on the intercept, and adjustment for baseline values. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HRQoL); secondary outcomes were mood state, dyspnea, gas exchange, functional status, pulmonary function, and exacerbation frequency.Although the addition of NIPPV did not significantly improve the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire compared to rehabilitation alone (mean difference in change between groups -1.3 points (95% CI: -9.7 to 7.4)), the addition of NIPPV did improve HRQoL assessed with the Maugeri Respiratory Failure questionnaire (-13.4% (-22.7 to -4.2; p = 0.005)), mood state (Hospital Anxiety and Depression scale -4.0 points (-7.8 to 0.0; p = 0.05)), dyspnea (Medical Research Council -0.4 points (-0.8 to -0.0; p = 0.05)), daytime arterial blood gases (PaCO2 -0.4 kPa (-0.8 to -0.2; p = 0.01); PaO2 0.8 kPa (0.0 to 1.5; p = 0.03)), 6-minute walking distance (77.3 m (46.4 to 108.0; p < 0.001)), Groningen Activity and Restriction scale (-3.8 points (-7.4 to -0.4; p = 0.03)), and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (115 ml (19 to 211; p = 0.019)). Exacerbation frequency was not changed.The addition of NIPPV to pulmonary rehabilitation for 2 years in severe COPD patients with chronic hypercapnic respiratory failure improves HRQoL, mood, dyspnea, gas exchange, exercise tolerance and lung function decline. The benefits increase further with time.ClinicalTrials.Gov (ID NCT00135538).

Project description:IntroductionChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) costs EURO 1.4 billion annually in healthcare costs. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a vital aspect of care for patients with COPD, but despite the compelling evidence, it is delivered to less than 30%. Frequent transport to the center-based program is regularly reported as reasons for non-attendance. The effectiveness and feasibility of pulmonary tele-rehabilitation (PTR) and home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (HPR) have never been investigated in patients with COPD who are unable to attend conventional outpatient PR.Materials and methodsThis study is a multicenter randomized controlled trial consisting of three parallel groups; PTR, HPR and a control group. 180 patients with moderate to very severe COPD, who are unable to attend in center-based PR programs will be included. The PTR group receives group-based resistance- and endurance training and patient education 60 min. twice a week for 10-weeks. HPR comprises an individual self-initiated home-based PR program with online motivational and professional counseling. The goal is to achieve at least 20 min. of muscle-endurance based exercises three days weekly for 10-weeks. The PTR and HPR group use a tablet with a conference system. The control group receives usual care (no PR). After completion of the intervention, the PTR and HPR groups are offered 65-weeks groupbased maintance program supervised once a week online via tablet. The primary outcome is change in respiratory symptoms measured with the COPD Assessment Test after 10-weeks (primary endpoint).DiscussionThe study aims to test a possible equivalence between PTR and HPR and their superiority to controls on respiratory symptoms. The study will provide valuable insights into the effectiveness of new rehabilitation models and maintenance programs for patients with COPD. If the two new delivery models can reduce respiratory symptoms, patients with moderate to very severe COPD can participate in both home- or centerbased PR.Trial registrationThe trial is registrered and approved by the Ethics Committee of The Capital Region of Denmark (H-22015777; 29.08.2022) and the Danish Data Protection Agency (P-2022-245-13101, 25.05.2022). The trial is registrered at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT05664945 (23.12.2022).

Project description:BackgroundVirtual reality training (VRT) uses computer software to track a user's movements and allow him or her to interact with a game presented on a television screen. VRT is increasingly being used for the rehabilitation of arm function, balance and walking after stroke. Patients often require ongoing therapy post discharge from inpatient rehabilitation. Outpatient therapy may be limited or inaccessible due to waiting lists, transportation issues, distance etc.; therefore, home-based VRT could provide the required therapy in a more convenient and accessible setting. The objectives of this parallel randomized feasibility trial are to determine (1) the feasibility of using VRT in the home post stroke and (2) the feasibility of a battery of quantitative and qualitative outcome measures of stroke recovery.MethodsForty patients who can stand for at least 2 min and are soon to be discharged from inpatient or outpatient rehabilitation post stroke are being recruited in Ottawa, Canada and being randomized to control and experimental groups. Participants in the experimental group use home-based VRT to do rehabilitative exercises for standing balance, stepping, reaching, strengthening and gentle aerobic fitness. Control group participants use an iPad with apps selected to rehabilitate cognition, hand fine motor skills and visual tracking/scanning. Both groups are instructed to perform 30 min of exercise 5 days a week for 6 weeks. VRT intensity and difficulty are monitored and adjusted remotely. Weekly telephone contact is made with all participants. Ability to recruit participants, ability to handle the technology and learn the activities, compliance, safety, enjoyment, perceived efficacy and cost of program delivery will be assessed. A battery of assessments of standing balance, gait and community integration will be assessed for feasibility of completion within this population and potential for improvement following the intervention. Effect sizes will be calculated.DiscussionThe results of this study will be used to support the creation of a definitive randomized controlled trial on the efficacy of home-based VRT for rehabilitation post stroke.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03261713 . Registered on 21 August 2017. Registration amended on 1 June 2018 to decrease enrollment from 40 to 20 due to a cut in study funding and difficulty recruiting participants.

Dataset Information

Randomized controlled trial of home-based vs. hospital-based pulmonary rehabilitation in post COVID-19 patients.

Background

Aim

Design

Setting

Population

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Clinical rehabilitation impact

Publications

Randomized controlled trial of home-based vs. hospital-based pulmonary rehabilitation in post COVID-19 patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets