Dataset Information

Treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: protocol for a systematic review and evidence map.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive lung disease, usually caused by tobacco smoking, but other important risk factors include exposures to combustion products of biomass fuels and environmental pollution. The introduction of several new (combination) inhaler therapies, increasing uncertainty about the role of inhaled corticosteroids and a rapid proliferation of the literature on management of stable COPD in general, call for novel ways of evidence synthesis in this area. A systematic review and evidence map can provide the basis for shared decision-making tools and help to establish a future research agenda.

Methods and analysis

This systematic review will follow an umbrella systematic review design (also called overview of reviews). We plan to conduct a comprehensive literature search of Ovid MEDLINE (including epub ahead of print, in process and other non-indexed citations), Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and Scopus from database inception to the present. We will include systematic reviews that assessed the effectiveness of any pharmacological or non-pharmacological intervention on one or more patient-important outcomes and/or lung function in patients with stable COPD. For every intervention/outcome pair, one systematic review will be included. An a priori protocol will guide, which systematic reviews will be chosen, how their credibility will be evaluated, and how the quality of the body of evidence will be rated. Data will be synthesised into an evidence map that will present a matrix that depicts each available treatment for stable COPD with a quantitative estimate on symptoms/outcomes from the patient perspective, along with an indication of the size and certainty in the evidence.

Ethics and dissemination

Approval by a research ethics committee is not required since the review will only include published data. The systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Prospero registration number

CRD42018095079.

SUBMITTER: Dobler CC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6501947 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:To investigate the effectiveness of Liuzijue exercise on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in the stable phase. METHODS:We searched six electronic bibliographic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wan Fang Data) from inception to August 2018. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included if they evaluated the effect of Liuzijue exercise on stable COPD. Cochrane Collaboration risk-of-bias tool (Cochrane Handbook 5.1.0) was used to assess the risk of bias of included RCTs. Meta-analysis was performed using the Review Manager software (RevMan V.5.3.5) provided by the Cochrane Collaboration. Outcomes assessed included dyspnea, exercise capacity, lung function, and quality of life. RESULTS:Fourteen RCTs involving 920 stable COPD patients were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The control groups received usual care. The average number of training sessions per participant was 9.3 per week, and the average length of these training sessions was 31.6?min per week. Training duration varied from 3 to 12?months. Meta-analysis results showed that Liuzijue exercise can effectively improve patients' Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnea Scale scores (MD?=?-?0.73, 95% CI: -?1.13 to -?0.33, P?<?0.05), 6MWD (MD?=?17.78, 95% CI: 7.97 to 27.58, P?<?0.05), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) (MD?=?0.23, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.38, P?<?0.05), the percentage of predicted values of FEV1 (FEV1%pred) (MD?=?7.59, 95% CI: 2.92 to 12.26, P?<?0.05), FEV1/FVC (Forced vital capacity) ratio (MD?=?6.81, 95% CI: 3.22 to 10.40, P?<?0.05), Quality of life: St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire total score (MD?=?-?9.85, 95%CI: -?13.13 to -?6.56, P?<?0.05), and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test score (MD?=?-?2.29, 95%CI: -?3.27, -?1.30, P?< 0.05). CONCLUSION:Evidence from meta-analysis suggested that Liuzijue exercise could improve dyspnea, exercise endurance, lung function, and quality of life for stable COPD patients. However, owing to the methodological bias and the placebo effect of Liuzijue exercise, there is a need for further research to confirm these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION:PROSPERO (ID: CRD42019130973 ).

Project description:IntroductionBoth stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and acute exacerbations represent leading causes of death, disability and healthcare expenditure. They are complex, heterogeneous and their mechanisms are poorly understood. The role of respiratory viruses has been studied extensively but is still not adequately addressed clinically. Through a rigorous evidence update, we aim to define the prevalence and clinical burden of the different respiratory viruses in stable COPD and exacerbations, and to investigate whether viral load of usual respiratory viruses could be used for diagnosis of exacerbations triggered by viruses, which are currently not diagnosed or treated aetiologically.Methods and analysisBased on a prospectively registered protocol, we will systematically review the literature using standard methods recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation working group. We will search Medline/PubMed, Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), the Cochrane Library, the WHO's Clinical Trials Registry and the proceedings of relevant international conferences on 2 March 2020. We will evaluate: (A) the prevalence of respiratory viruses in stable COPD and exacerbations, (B) differences in the viral loads of respiratory viruses in stable COPD vs exacerbations, to explore whether the viral load of prevalent respiratory viruses could be used as a diagnostic biomarker for exacerbations triggered by viruses and (C) the association between the presence of respiratory viruses and clinical outcomes in stable COPD and in exacerbations.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required since no primary data will be collected. Our findings will be presented in national and international scientific conferences and will be published in peer reviewed journals. Respiratory viruses currently represent a lost opportunity to improve the outcomes of both stable COPD and exacerbations. Our work aspires to 'demystify' the prevalence and clinical burden of viruses in stable COPD and exacerbations and to promote clinical and translational research.Prospero registration numberCRD42019147658.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a challenging disease whose prevalence has increased over the last decades. Non-pharmacological therapies such as pulmonary rehabilitation occupy a core position in patient management. Among these therapies, manual therapy reduces symptoms and increases exercise capacity targeting musculoskeletal problems. Chuna, a traditional Korean manual therapy, has improved pulmonary disorders in clinical practice but unfortunately has not had its effects reported. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of manual therapy, focused on the use of Chuna in the management of COPD patients. METHODS:The following databases will be used in this study: MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), China National Knowledge Database (CNKI), KoreaMed, Korean Medical Database (KMbase), and Oriental Medicine Advanced Searching Integrated System (OASIS). The primary outcome comprises lung function and exercise capacity. Secondary outcomes included symptoms, quality of life, and adverse events. We will include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and crossover studies. Two independent reviewers will screen the searched studies, determine if they are suitable for inclusion, and perform data extraction. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. When appropriate, data will be pooled across studies for meta-analysis using a fixed or random effects model. When quantitative synthesis is not appropriate, the evidence will be summarized qualitatively. RESULTS:This study will provide a comprehensive review of the available evidence to assess the efficacy of Chuna for COPD patients. Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated electronically and in print. CONCLUSIONS:This study will provide high-quality current evidence for evaluation the efficacy of Chuna for patients with COPD. Clinicians, patients and policy makers may find this review useful in making decisions regarding the use of Chuna for patients with COPD. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42019141150.

Project description:IntroductionChronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a highly prevalent chronic disease characterised by persistent respiratory symptoms. A focus of COPD interventional studies is directed towards prevention of exacerbations leading to hospital readmissions. Telehealth as a method of remote patient monitoring and care delivery may be implemented to reduce hospital readmissions and improve self-management of disease. Prior reviews have not systematically assessed the efficacies of various telehealth functionalities in patients with COPD at different stages of disease severity. We aim to evaluate which COPD telehealth interventions, classified by their functionalities, are most effective in improving patient with COPD management measured by both clinical and resource utilisation outcomes.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a systematic review which will include randomised controlled trials comparing the efficacy of telehealth interventions versus standard care in patients with COPD with confirmed disease severity based on forced expiratory volume(%) levels. An electronic search strategy will be used to identify trials published since 2000 in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINHAL. Telehealth is described as remote monitoring and delivery of care where patient data/clinical information is routinely or continuously collected and/or processed, presented to the patient and transferred to a clinical care institution for feedback, triage and intervention by a clinical specialist. Two authors will independently screen articles for inclusion, assess risk of bias and extract data. We will merge studies into a meta-analysis if the interventions, technologies, participants and underlying clinical questions are homogeneous enough. We will use a random-effects model, as we expect some heterogeneity between interventions. In cases where a meta-analysis is not possible, we will synthesise findings narratively. We will assess the quality of the evidence for the main outcomes using GRADE.Ethics and disseminationResearch ethics approval is not required. The findings will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42018083671.