ABSTRACT
Rationale: Patients with chronic lung disease experience dyspnea and other symptoms that significantly affect quality of life and can result in elevated rates of depression and anxiety. Concomitant anxiety and depression can often result in poorer outcomes in these patients and can hinder their confidence in self-management of their disease. Mindfulness involves non-judgmental attention to a person's surroundings and experiences cultivates the ability to be aware of the present moment. A formal mindfulness-based intervention developed at Ohio State University called Mindfulness in Motion offered within the established structure of a pulmonary rehabilitation program was implemented in both virtual and in-person format to promote disease self-efficacy, reduce stress and improve symptoms of anxiety and depression that often accompany chronic symptomatic lung disease. Methods: This is a prospective feasibility/pilot study pre/post-test design with an intervention and control wait list groups. All new adult patients enrolling in pulmonary rehabilitation were eligible. Mindfulness in Motion (MIM) is a Mindfulness Based Intervention that is offered in a group format for 1hr/week/8 weeks combined with 10-20 online audio and video programs to facilitate individual mindfulness practice. The Mindfulness in Motion program relaced one of the usual 1 hour pulmonary rehabilitation education sessions. One round of the intervention was done virtually via Microsoft Teams due to the restrictions of the Covid-19 pandemic and an additional in-person round of this program is currently ongoing. The primary outcome is the PROMIS Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Conditions-Symptoms. Breath counts pre and post intervention are of interest as well. Secondary outcomes are: PROMIS Percieved Stress Scale, PROMIS Anxiety Short Form, PROMIS Depression short form and Respiratory Rate. These measures were collected pre-intervention, post-intervention, 6 months and 1 year. Results: Data collection and analysis of primary and secondary endpoints is currently ongoing. However, early analysis shows a decrease in respiratory rate immediately post-intervention. In initial 4 subjects in which respiratory rate data was recorded, 3 out of 4 patients showed significant consistent reduction in respiratory rate from the beginning to the end of each session in the 7 weeks of the intervention already completed (see Table 1). Conclusion: Mindfulness in Motion is a mindfulness intervention that is implementable within the existing structure of pulmonary rehabilitation. Further, it may be effective at slowing breathing rate in these patients prior to exercising which may be beneficial to participation. Further investigation with a larger randomized control trial would be feasible and warranted for further study. (Table Presented).
ABSTRACT
Objective: Mindfulness in Motion (MIM) is an organizationally sponsored resiliency building program for faculty and staff at a large academic metropolitan health center. It has consistently produced significant reductions in burnout and perceived stress, alongside significant increases in work engagement and resilience. COVID-19 necessitated the transition to 100% virtual delivery of this programming. This study compared outcome measures of virtual delivery to the traditional in-person delivery where community building amongst participants has always been a program strength. Methods: Outcome measures from the Autumn 2020 (AU20) MIM cohorts (n=31) were compared with the Autumn 2019 (AU19) MIM cohorts (n=42). Participants in the AU19 session received in-person facilitated MIM programming, whereas, the participants of the AU20 session received 100% virtual delivery of MIM via Zoom. To determine if virtual delivery of MIM to the AU20 cohorts rendered the same results as the traditional in-person programming of MIM in AU19, comparison analyses were conducted. Results: Total burnout was determined by scores on the subscales of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI). The MBI subscales of the AU19 and AU20 cohorts revealed no significant differences in participant emotional exhaustion (p=0.2177), depersonalization (p=0.4063), and personal accomplishment (p=0.1407). The Connor Davidson Resiliency Scale (CDRS), also produced no significant difference (p=0.3891) between groups. Similar trends were observed for the remaining outcome measures, showing no significant differences in scores for the Perceived Stress Scale (p=0.5290) and the Utretch Work Engagement Scale (p=0.2087). Qualitative analysis of AU20 cohorts reported community support during COVID as a substantial intervention benefit. Conclusion: Virtual delivery of MIM had not been previously tested as MIM was designed as an in-person program. Results of the first virtually delivered MIM reflect that participants achieved very similar results suggesting that method delivery did not impact program effectiveness. Additionally, MIM created a community in a time where community was not readily accessible.