Dataset Information

Efficacy of Unsupervised Home-Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

ABSTRACT: Purpose:Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a well-established treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The standard protocol for PR requires frequent hospital visits, which can be difficult for patients. We performed this study to assess whether unsupervised home-based PR (HBPR) is effective for patients with COPD. Patients and Methods:After assessing the outcome data, including the results of a COPD assessment test (CAT); the body mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnea, and exercise capacity (BODE) index; a spirometry; the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnea scale; and the 6-min walking test (6MWT), specialists imparted 1-hour education to patients regarding unsupervised HBPR at the baseline visit. This included methods for breathing, inhaler use, stretching, and exercise. On reviewing diaries after 8 weeks from the first visit, patients who exercised at least thrice per week were classified as the compliant group and the others were categorized as the noncompliant group. Changes in the outcomes were compared between the compliant and noncompliant groups. Results:A total of 41 patients were enrolled in this study; for 8 weeks of unsupervised HBPR, there were significant improvements in CAT scores (-4.62±4.61 vs 2.40±6.73; P=0.002), BODE index (-1.00±1.06 vs -0.20±0.56; P=0.01), and forced expiratory volume in 1 s (0.05±0.19 vs -0.09±0.16; P=0.02) among patients in the compliant group, compared with the noncompliant group. Moreover, their CAT (16.46±7.80 vs 11.85±7.23; P=0.03) and mMRC scores (2.54±0.76 vs 1.81±0.63; P=0.001) improved significantly after 8 weeks, compared with those at baseline. On the other hand, patients in the noncompliant group showed no significant improvement in any of the outcomes. Conclusion:In this study, compliant patients with unsupervised HBPR achieved favorable outcomes in 8 weeks. Thus, we recommend unsupervised HBPR for patients with COPD, even when regular hospital visits for PR are not possible. Trial Registration:NCT03754881.

SUBMITTER: Lee JH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7532041 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy of Unsupervised Home-Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Lee Jang Ho JH Lee Hyang Yi HY Jang Youngwon Y Lee Jae Seung JS Oh Yeon-Mok YM Lee Sang-Do SD Lee Sei Won SW

International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease 20200928

<h4>Purpose</h4>Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a well-established treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The standard protocol for PR requires frequent hospital visits, which can be difficult for patients. We performed this study to assess whether unsupervised home-based PR (HBPR) is effective for patients with COPD.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>After assessing the outcome data, including the results of a COPD assessment test (CAT); the body mass index, airflow obstruction, ...[more]

PMID: 33061347

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is considered a key component in managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients, uptake remains suboptimal. This systematic review aimed to determine the effectiveness of home-based PR (HBPR) programs for COPD patients.MethodsA systematic review of scholarly literature published within the last 10 years from the conception of this project was conducted using internationally recognized guidelines. Search strategies were applied to electronic databases and clinical trial registries through March 2020 and updated in November 2021 to identify studies comparing HBPR with 'usual care' or outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation (OPR). To critically appraise randomized studies, the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool (ROB) was used. The quality of non-randomized studies was evaluated using the ACROBAT-NRSI tool. The quality of evidence relating to key outcomes was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL), exacerbation frequencies, COPD-related hospital admissions, and program adherence. Three independent reviewers assessed methodologic quality and reviewed the studies.ResultsTwelve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2 comparative observational studies were included. While considerable evidence relating to the effectiveness of HBPR programs for COPD patients exist, overall quality is low. There were no differences between HBPR and OPR in terms of safety, HRQoL, functional exercise capacity and health care resource utilization. Compared to usual care, functional exercise capacity seemed to significantly improve after HBPR. While patient compliance with HBPR is good, two factors appeared to increase the 'risk' of non-compliance: expectations of patients to 1) complete daily diaries/activity logs and 2) engage in solely unsupervised exercise sessions.ConclusionThe overall quality for most outcomes was low to very low; however, HBPR seems to offer comparable short-term benefits to OPR.

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:Pulmonary rehabilitation is widely advocated for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to improve exercise capacity, symptoms and quality of life, however only a minority of individuals with COPD are able to participate. Travel and transport are frequently cited as barriers to uptake of centre-based programs. Other models of pulmonary rehabilitation, including home-based programs, have been proposed in order to improve access to this important treatment. Previous studies of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD have demonstrated improvement in exercise capacity and quality of life, but not all elements of the program were conducted in the home environment. It is uncertain whether a pulmonary rehabilitation program delivered in its entirety at home is cost effective and equally capable of producing benefits in exercise capacity, symptoms and quality of life as a hospital-based program. The aim of this study is to compare the costs and benefits of home-based and hospital-based pulmonary rehabilitation for people with COPD.This randomised, controlled, equivalence trial conducted at two centres will recruit 166 individuals with spirometrically confirmed COPD. Participants will be randomly allocated to hospital-based or home-based pulmonary rehabilitation. Hospital programs will follow the traditional outpatient model consisting of twice weekly supervised exercise training and education for eight weeks. Home-based programs will involve one home visit followed by seven weekly telephone calls, using a motivational interviewing approach to enhance exercise participation and facilitate self management. The primary outcome is change in 6-minute walk distance immediately following intervention. Measurements of exercise capacity, physical activity, symptoms and quality of life will be taken at baseline, immediately following the intervention and at 12 months, by a blinded assessor. Completion rates will be compared between programs. Direct healthcare costs and indirect (patient-related) costs will be measured to compare the cost-effectiveness of each program.This trial will identify whether home-based pulmonary rehabilitation can deliver equivalent benefits to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation in a cost effective manner. The results of this study will contribute new knowledge regarding alternative models of pulmonary rehabilitation and will inform pulmonary rehabilitation guidelines for COPD.

Dataset Information

Efficacy of Unsupervised Home-Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Publications

Efficacy of Unsupervised Home-Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets