Dataset Information

Lung volume reduction eligibility in patients with COPD completing pulmonary rehabilitation: results from the UK National Asthma and COPD Audit Programme.

ABSTRACT: Objectives: To establish what proportion of patients completing a UK pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programme meet the 2018 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guideline (NG115) criteria to have a respiratory review to establish whether referral to a lung volume reduction multidisciplinary team would be appropriate. This respiratory review would include evaluation of the presence of hyperinflation and the presence of emphysema on CT scan. The NICE criteria include measures of breathlessness and exercise capacity but these parameters are not completely defined.

Design: Observational study.

Setting: PR programmes across the UK in 2015 (210 centres) and 2017 (184 centres) entering data into the Royal College of Physicians' National Asthma and COPD Audit Programme.

Participants: 8295 (55.7%) of 14?889 patients in programmes using incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT) or 6-minute walk test (6MWT) as an outcome measure completed PR, and 4856 (32.6%) had complete data recorded (6MWT/ISWT, baseline spirometry, Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnoea score).

Results: Depending on the walking test safety threshold adopted for the ISWT (?140?m or ? 80?m) and the MRC dyspnoea score threshold used (MRC score ?3?or ?4 at the end of PR), between 4.9% and 18.1% of PR completers met the NICE criteria for a lung volume reduction-focused respiratory review.

Conclusions: Lung volume reduction therapies are beneficial in appropriately selected patients with COPD, but few procedures are performed, and treatment pathways are unclear. These data help to inform the feasibility of the approach recommended by NICE and highlight the need for future systematic pathways to reduce inequalities in patients being considered for effective treatments.

SUBMITTER: Buttery SC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7703433 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Lung volume reduction eligibility in patients with COPD completing pulmonary rehabilitation: results from the UK National Asthma and COPD Audit Programme.

Buttery Sara C SC Lewis Adam A Kemp Samuel V SV Banya Winston W Quint Jennifer K JK Steiner Michael C MC Hopkinson Nicholas S NS

BMJ open 20201127 11

<h4>Objectives</h4>To establish what proportion of patients completing a UK pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programme meet the 2018 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guideline (NG115) criteria to have a respiratory review to establish whether referral to a lung volume reduction multidisciplinary team would be appropriate. This respiratory review would include evaluation of the presence of hyperinflation and the presence of emphyse ...[more]

PMID: 33247022

Similar Datasets

Project description:Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients are characterised for presenting dyspnea, which reduces their physical capacity and tolerance to physical exercise. The aim of this study was to analyse the effects of adding a Feel-Breathe (FB) device for inspiratory muscle training (IMT) to an 8-week pulmonary rehabilitation programme. Twenty patients were randomised into three groups: breathing with FB (FBG), oronasal breathing without FB (ONBG) and control group (CG). FBG and ONBG carried out the same training programme with resistance, strength and respiratory exercises for 8 weeks. CG did not perform any pulmonary rehabilitation programme. Regarding intra group differences in the value obtained in the post-training test at the time when the maximum value in the pre-training test was obtained (PostPRE), FBG obtained lower values in oxygen consumption (VO2, mean = -435.6 mL/min, Bayes Factor (BF10) > 100), minute ventilation (VE, -8.5 L/min, BF10 = 25), respiratory rate (RR, -3.3 breaths/min, BF10 = 2), heart rate (HR, -13.7 beats/min, BF10 > 100) and carbon dioxide production (VCO2, -183.0 L/min, BF10 = 50), and a greater value in expiratory time (Tex, 0.22 s, BF10 = 12.5). At the maximum value recorded in the post-training test (PostFINAL), FBG showed higher values in the total time of the test (Tt, 4.3 min, BF10 = 50) and respiratory exchange rate (RER, 0.05, BF10 = 1.3). Regarding inter group differences at PrePOST, FBG obtained a greater negative increment than ONBG in the ventilatory equivalent of CO2 (EqCO2, -3.8 L/min, BF10 = 1.1) and compared to CG in VE (-8.3 L/min, BF10 = 3.6), VCO2 (-215.9 L/min, BF10 = 3.0), EqCO2 (-3.7 L/min, BF10 = 1.1) and HR (-12.9 beats/min, BF10 = 3.4). FBG also showed a greater PrePOST positive increment in Tex (0.21 s, BF10 = 1.4) with respect to CG. At PreFINAL, FBG presented a greater positive increment compared to CG in Tt (4.4 min, BF10 = 3.2) and negative in VE/VCO2 intercept (-4.7, BF10 = 1.1). The use of FB added to a pulmonary rehabilitation programme in COPD patients could improve tolerance in the incremental exercise test and energy efficiency. However, there is only a statically significant difference between FBG and ONBG in EqCO2. Therefore, more studies are necessary to reach a definitive conclusion about including FB in a pulmonary rehabilitation programme.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Standardised evidenced-based materials and mechanisms to facilitate the delivery of the education component of pulmonary rehabilitation are not widely available. The aims of this study were: 1) to adapt the self-management programme Living Well with COPD (LWWCOPD) programme, for embedding in pulmonary rehabilitation; and, 2) to conduct a process evaluation of the adapted programme. METHODS:The adaptations to the LWWCOPD programme were informed by focus groups, current practice, relevant research and guideline documents. Pulmonary rehabilitation sites used the adapted programme, the LWWCOPD programme for pulmonary rehabilitation, to deliver the education component of pulmonary rehabilitation. A process evaluation was conducted: elements included reach (patients' attendance rates), dose delivered (amount of programme delivered), dose received (health professional and patient satisfaction) and fidelity (impact on patients' knowledge, understanding and self-efficacy on the Understanding COPD questionnaire). Descriptive statistics (mean, SD) were used to summarise demographics and key data from the feedback questionnaires. Qualitative feedback on the programme was collated and categorised. Changes in the Understanding COPD questionnaire were examined using paired t-tests. RESULTS:The LWWCOPD programme for pulmonary rehabilitation was delivered in eleven hospital- and community-based programmes (n=25 health professionals, n=57 patients with COPD). It consisted of six weekly 30-45 minute sessions. The process evaluation showed positive results: 62.3% of patients attended ? 4 education sessions (reach); mean (SD) 90 (10)% of the session content were delivered (dose delivered); the majority of sessions were rated as excellent or good by health professionals and patients. Patients' satisfaction was high: mean (SD) Section B of the Understanding COPD questionnaire: 91.67 (9.55)% (dose received). Knowledge, understanding and self-efficacy improved significantly: mean change (95% CI): Section A of the Understanding COPD questionnaire: 26.75 (21.74 to 31.76)%, BCKQ 10.64 (6.92 to 14.37)% (fidelity). CONCLUSION:This rigorous process evaluation has demonstrated that the LWWCOPD programme for pulmonary rehabilitation can be used to deliver high quality, consistent and equitable education sessions during hospital and community-based pulmonary rehabilitation. This programme is now available worldwide (http://www.livingwellwithcopd.com/living-well-and-pulmonary-rehabilitation.html). TRIAL REGISTRATION:This study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (reference number: NCT01226836).

Project description:ObjectiveAssessment of the extent of variation in delineations and dose optimisation performed at multiple UK centres as a result of interobserver variation and protocol differences.MethodsCT/MR images of 2 cervical cancer patients previously treated with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and Brachytherapy were distributed to 11 UK centres. Centres delineated structures and produced treatment plans following their local protocol. Organ at risk delineations were assessed dosimetrically through application of the original treatment plan and target volume delineations were assessed in terms of variation in absolute volume and length, width and height. Treatment plan variation was assessed across all centres and across centres that followed EMBRACE II. Treatment plans were assessed using total EQD2 delivered and were compared to EMBRACE II dose aims. Variation in combined intracavitary/interstitial brachytherapy treatments was also assessed.ResultsBrachytherapy target volume delineations contained variation due to differences in protocol used, window/level technique and differences in interpretations of grey zones. Planning target volume delineations were varied due to protocol differences and extended parametrial tissue inclusion. All centres met EMBRACE II plan aims for PTV V95 and high-riskclinical target volume D90 EQD2, despite variation in prescription dose, fractionation and treatment technique.ConclusionBrachytherapy target volume delineations are varied due to differences in contouring guidelines and protocols used. Planning target volume delineations are varied due to the uncertainties surrounding the extent of parametrial involvement. Dosimetric optimisation is sufficient across all centres to satisfy EMBRACE II planning aims despite significant variation in protocols used.Advances in knowledgePrevious multi-institutional audits of cervical cancer radiotherapy practices have been performed in Europe and the USA. This study is the first of its kind to be performed in the UK.

Dataset Information

Lung volume reduction eligibility in patients with COPD completing pulmonary rehabilitation: results from the UK National Asthma and COPD Audit Programme.

Publications

Lung volume reduction eligibility in patients with COPD completing pulmonary rehabilitation: results from the UK National Asthma and COPD Audit Programme.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets