Telerehabilitation in pulmonary diseases.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Telerehabilitation is an alternative delivery model for pulmonary rehabilitation, an evidence-based nonpharmacological intervention, in people with chronic pulmonary disease. This review synthesizes current evidence regarding the telerehabilitation model for pulmonary rehabilitation with an emphasis on its potential and implementation challenges, as well as the clinical experiences from the COVID-19 pandemic. RECENT FINDINGS: Different models of telerehabilitation for delivering pulmonary rehabilitation exist. Current studies comparing telerehabilitation to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation primarily focus on the evaluation in people with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, which demonstrated equivalent improvements in exercise capacity, health-related quality of life and symptoms with improved programme completion rates. Although telerehabilitation may improve access to pulmonary rehabilitation by addressing travel burden, improving schedule flexibility and geographic disparity, there are challenges of ensuring satisfaction of healthcare interactions and delivering core components of initial patient assessment and exercise prescription remotely. SUMMARY: Further evidence is needed on the role of telerehabilitation in various chronic pulmonary diseases, as well as the effectiveness of different modalities in delivering telerehabilitation programmes. Economic and implementation evaluation of currently available and emerging models of telerehabilitation in delivering pulmonary rehabilitation are needed to ensure sustainable adoption into clinical management for people with chronic pulmonary disease.

[Efficacy of tele-rehabilitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review].

The COVID-19 pandemic has required the use of new technologies to carry out rehabilitation sessions for COP D remotely. The aim of this systematic review was to analyse the available evidence on the efficacy of telerehabilitation in COPD patients. PubMed, WOS, PEDro and Cochrane databases were consulted. The systematic review included nine clinical trials, 55.5% of which display good methodological quality. The most commonly used rehabilitation methods were applications or software for real-time video-calls, visualisation of exercises and recording progress. TR was as effective as outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation, with greater benefits in functional capacity, self-efficacy, mental health, exacerbations and emergency care visits, offering a cost-effective option with high patient satisfaction. The small number of studies and the variety of rehabilitation methods examined limit the value of the evidence obtained.

Tele-pulmonary rehabilitation with face to face in COVID-19 pandemic: A hybrid modeling.

Introduction: Post-illness pulmonary rehabilitation indications of Coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) may include fatigue, respiratory restriction, exercise limitation, muscle weakness, deterioration in body composition, quality of life, and psychological status. Since tele-pulmonary rehabilitation (tele-PR) is the prominent approach in the current situation and questions such as who, how, and when are still unclear, in this study we aimed to investigate the efficacy of tele-PR as a hybrid model with face-to-face in post-COVID-19 patients. Materials and Methods: Thirty one patients who had completed viral infection treatment with the diagnosis of COVID-19 but still had persistent symptoms were enrolled in an eight-week synchronized video-conference mediated telePR program in a hybrid format, with the initial and final assessments and the first two sessions conducted in person. Before and after the tele-PR, pulmonary functions, exercise capacity, respiratory and peripheral muscle strength, body composition, quality of life, and psychological states were evaluated. Result: After the tele-PR program; a statistically significant improvement was observed in dyspnea sensation evaluated with modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) and BORG levels, body mass index (BMI), incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT), endurance shuttle walk test (ESWT), handgrip test, deltoid, and quadriceps 1-repetition maximum (1RM) results, maximal inspiratory and expiratory pressure (MIP, MEP), peripheral muscle strengths, fatigue severity scale and Nottingham extended activities of daily living scale (NEADLS). Conclusions: In this study, it has been shown that the hybrid model of tele-PR enables a comprehensive evaluation as well as the effective and safe applicability of a multidisciplinary and remotely directed program even in high workloads for post-COVID-19 patients.

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

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.

A qualitative assessment of the pulmonary rehabilitation decision-making needs of patients living with COPD.

Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is highly evidenced but underutilised in patients living with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A menu of centre and home-based programmes is available to facilitate uptake but is not routinely offered. An appraisal of the current PR referral approach compared to a menu-based approach was warranted to explore the decision-making needs of patients living with COPD when considering a referral to PR. Face-to-face or telephone, semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients diagnosed with COPD and referred to PR and referring HCPs. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the enhanced critical incident technique. 14 HCPs and 11 patients were interviewed (n = 25). Interview data generated 276 critical incidents which informed 28 categories (30 sub-categories). Five high-level themes captured patients' decision-making needs for PR: Understanding COPD, understanding PR, perceived ability to access PR, a desire to accept PR, and supporting the offer. A menu-based approach would further support patients' PR decision-making, however, insufficient knowledge of the programmes would limit its perceived feasibility and acceptability. The development of shared decision making interventions (e.g., a patient decision aid) to elicit patient-centred, meaningful discussions about the menu is suggested.

Protocol for a single-centre mixed-method pre-post single-arm feasibility trial of a culturally appropriate 6-week pulmonary rehabilitation programme among adults with functionally limiting chronic respiratory diseases in Malawi.

INTRODUCTION: Malawi has a substantial burden of chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) which cause significant morbidity and loss of economic productivity, affecting patients, families and health systems. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a highly recommended non-pharmacological intervention in the clinical management of people with CRDs. However, Malawi lacks published evidence on the implementation of PR for people with CRDs. This trial will test the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a culturally appropriate hospital-based PR programme among adults with functionally limiting CRDs at Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital in Blantyre, Malawi. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a single-centre mixed-methods pre-post single-arm feasibility trial. Ten patients aged ≥18 years, with a spirometry confirmed diagnosis of a CRD and breathlessness of ≥2 on the modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale, will be consecutively recruited. Their baseline lung function, exercise tolerance and health status will be assessed; including spirometry, Incremental Shuttle Walk Test and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test, respectively. Pretrial semistructured in-depth interviews will explore their experiences of living with CRD and potential enablers and barriers to their PR uptake. Along with international PR guidelines, these data will inform culturally appropriate delivery of PR. We initially propose a 6-week, twice-weekly, supervised centre-based PR programme, with an additional weekly home-based non-supervised session. Using combination of researcher observation, interaction with the participants, field notes and informal interviews with the participants, we will assess the feasibility of running the programme in the following areas: participants' recruitment, retention, engagement and protocol adherence. Following programme completion (after 6 weeks), repeat assessments of lung function, exercise tolerance and health status will be conducted. Quantitative changes in clinical outcomes will be described in relation to published minimal clinically important differences. Post-trial semistructured interviews will capture participants' perceived impact of the PR programme on their quality of life, enablers, and barriers to fully engaging with the programme, and allow iteration of its design. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for this trial was obtained from University of Malawi College of Medicine Research and Ethics Committee (COMREC), Blantyre, Malawi (protocol number: P.07/19/2752) and University of Leicester Research Ethics Committee, Leicester, UK (ethics reference: 31574). The results of the trial will be disseminated through oral presentations at local and international scientific conferences or seminars and publication in a peer-reviewed journal. We will also engage the participants who complete the PR trial and the Science Communication Department at Malawi-Liverpool-Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme to organise community outreach activities within Blantyre to educate communities about CRDs and PR. We will also broadcast our trial results through national radio station programmes such as the weekly "Thanzi la Onse" (Health of All) programme by Times Radio Malawi. We will formally present our trial results to Blantyre District Health Office and Malawi Ministry of Health. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13836793.

Feasibility of an online platform delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation for individuals with chronic respiratory disease.

INTRODUCTION: SARS-CoV-2 has restricted access to face-to-face delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). Evidence suggests that telehealth-PR is non-inferior to outpatient PR. However, it is unknown whether patients who have been referred to face-to-face programmes can feasibly complete an online-PR programme. METHODS: This service evaluation used a mixed-methods approach to investigate a rapid PR service remodelling using the University of Gloucestershire eLearn Moodle platform. Quantitative baseline demographic and PR outcome data were collected from online-PR participants, and semistructured interviews were completed with PR staff and participants. RESULTS: Twenty-five individuals were eligible from a PR waiting list. Thirteen declined participation and 14 completed PR. Significant pre-post online PR improvements were achieved in 1 min sit-to-stand (CI 2.1 to 9 (p=0.004)), Generalised Anxiety Disorder (CI -0.3 to -2.6 (p=0.023)), Primary Health Questionnaire-9 (CI -0.3 to -5.1 (p=0.029)), Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire dyspnoea (CI 0.5 to 1.3 (p=0.001)), fatigue (CI 0.7 to 2 (p=0.0004)), emotion (CI 0.7 to 1.7 (p=0.0002)), mastery (CI 0.4 to 1.3 (p=0.001)). Interviews indicated that patient PR inclusion was made possible with digital support and a PR introduction session improved participant engagement and safety. Incremental progression of exercise was perceived as more successful online compared with face-to-face PR. However, perceptions were that education sessions were less successful. Online-PR required significant staff time resource. DISCUSSION: Online-PR improves patient outcomes and is feasible and acceptable for individuals referred for face-to-face PR in the context of a requirement for social distancing. Face-to-face programmes can be adapted in a rapid fashion with both staff and participants perceiving benefit. Future pragmatic trials are now warranted comparing online-PR including remote assessments to centre-based PR with suitably matched outcomes, and patient and staff perceptions sought regarding barriers and facilitators of online delivery.

Key toolkits of non-pharmacological management in COPD: during and beyond COVID-19.

Individuals with COPD are at higher risk of severe disease and mortality if they contract COVID-19. Shielding and social distancing have negatively impacted the delivery of routine care for COPD patients, which should be maintained to avoid further deterioration. We aimed to review the literature about the key toolkits of non-pharmacological treatments of COPD patients before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. In particular, we focused on smoking cessation, pulmonary rehabilitation, and telehealth delivery approaches during the COVID-19 crisis. Smoking cessation services are important to mitigate the spread of the virus, especially in people with chronic lung disease; the pandemic, in one way or another, has helped to enhance people's motivation to quit smoking. Also, tele-rehabilitation is considered as effective as conventional pulmonary rehabilitation in controlling symptoms of disease, promoting physical activity, and enhancing self-management of COPD. Tele-rehabilitation offers flexibility and it could be the dominant mode for providing a pulmonary rehabilitation programme. Finally, the use of telehealth (TH) modes has trended during the pandemic. Consensus about the effectiveness of TH in reducing exacerbation events is still inconclusive. In the context of COPD, further clinical research must concentrate on understanding attitudes, behaviours, and motivations towards smoking cessation. Further recommendations include gauging the feasibility of a long-term tele-rehabilitation programme in large COPD populations, designing more COPD-related mobile apps, and evaluating the feasibility of tele-rehabilitation in clinical practice.

Revisiting pulmonary rehabilitation during COVID-19 pandemic: a narrative review.

There has been an apparent association between the risks of complications with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in patients with a history of existing chronic respiratory diseases during the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). SARS-CoV-2 poses a severe risk in cardiopulmonary management. Moreover, chronic respiratory diseases may further amplify the risk of morbidity and mortality among the afflicted population in the pandemic era. The present review outlines the importance of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in persons with chronic respiratory diseases (Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and Asthma) during the COVID-19 era. In this context, amongst the population with a pre-existing pulmonary diagnosis who have contracted SARS-CoV-2, following initial medical management and acute recovery, exercise-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) may play a crucial role in long-term management and recovery. The energy conservation techniques will play a pragmatic role in PR of mild to moderate severity cases to counter post-COVID-19 fatigue. Moreover, there is also an urgent need to effectively address post-COVID-19 anxiety and depression, affecting the PR delivery system.

Rapid access rehabilitation after exacerbations of COPD - A qualitative study.

PURPOSE: Rehabilitation after acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is beneficial, but its feasibility is questionable. Feasibility is potentiated by stakeholder involvement during program development. We aimed to explore the perspectives of various stakeholders towards an innovative rapid access rehabilitation (RAR) program for patients immediately following hospitalization for an AECOPD. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients recently hospitalized for AECOPD, healthcare professionals (HCP) and policymakers providing care for such patients. Thematic analysis was performed. RESULTS: Three patients (1 female; 62-89 years; GOLD D), ten HCP (3 females, 31-71 years) and three policymakers (3 females, 38-55 years) participated. Patients, HCP and policymakers shared similar visions for the development of a RAR program. Five main themes and ten subthemes were identified. They comprised: Pre-RAR aspects (Management properties, Eligibility), RAR program (Outcomes, Structure, Components), RAR optimization (Referral, Uptake), Partnership (Collaboration, Dedicated Coordinator) and COVID-19 (Adaptations). Essential elements included: identifying clear eligibility criteria, addressing patients' needs at the time of hospital discharge, having a structured education and self-management program and modifying to respond to unexpected events (e.g., COVID). Suggestions to optimize referrals included a clear referral pathway, improving program awareness, assigning dedicated care coordinators to provide patient support throughout the program and establishing strong partnerships among different care settings and providers. CONCLUSIONS: Identifying the essential program elements and approaches to optimize referrals, were considered to be key design approaches for success in establishing RAR.

Bronchodilator reversibility testing in post-COVID-19 patients undergoing pulmonary rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: The usefulness of bronchodilators in coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) survivors is still uncertain, especially for patients with a concomitant obstructive lung disease. We aimed at verifying the level of bronchodilator reversibility in COVID-19 patients undergoing multidisciplinary pulmonary rehabilitation after the acute phase. METHODS: We enrolled 105 consecutive patients referring to the Pulmonary Rehabilitation Unit of Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri Spa SB, IRCCS of Telese Terme, Benevento, Italy after being discharged from the COVID-19 acute care ward and after recovering from acute COVID-19 pneumonia. All subjects performed a spirometry before and after inhalation of salbutamol 400 µg to determine the bronchodilation response within 48 h of admission to the unit. RESULTS: All patients had suffered from a moderate to severe COVID-19, classified 3 or 4 according to the WHO classification, Seventeen patients had concomitant obstructive lung disease (14 suffering from COPD and 3 from asthma). FEV1 after salbutamol improved on average by 41.7 mL in the entire examined sample, by 29.4 mL in subjects without concomitant obstructive lung diseases, by 59.3 mL in COPD patients and by 320.0 mL in asthma patients. Mean FVC after salbutamol improved by 65.7 mL in the entire examined sample, by 52.5 mL in subjects without concomitant obstructive lung diseases, by 120.0 mL in COPD patients, and by 200.0 mL in asthma patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that a treatment with bronchodilators must always be taken into consideration in post-COVID-19 patients because it can induce a functional improvement that, even if small, can facilitate the breathing of these patients.

Pulmonary Rehabilitation in a Post-COVID-19 World: Telerehabilitation as a New Standard in Patients with COPD.

Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is effective in reducing symptoms and improving health status, and exercise tolerance of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) pandemic has greatly impacted PR programs and their delivery to patients. Owing to fears of viral transmission and resultant outbreaks of COVID-19, institution-based PR programs have been forced to significantly reduce enrolment or in some cases completely shut down during the pandemic. As a majority of COPD patients are elderly and have multiple co-morbidities including cardiovascular disease and diabetes, they are notably susceptible to severe complications of COVID-19. As such, patients have been advised to stay at home and avoid social contact to the maximum extent possible. This has increased patients' vulnerability to physical deconditioning, depression, and social isolation. To address this major gap in care, some traditional hospital or clinic-centered PR programs have converted some or all of their learning contents to home-based telerehabilitation during the pandemic. There are, however, some significant barriers to this approach that have impeded its implementation in the community. These include variable access and use of technology (by patients), a lack of standardization of methods and tools for evaluation of the program, and inadequate training and resources for health professionals in optimally delivering telerehabilitation to patients. There is a pressing need for high-quality studies on these modalities of PR to enable the successful implementation of PR at home and via teleconferencing technologies. Here, we highlight the importance of telerehabilitation of patients with COPD in the post-COVID world and discuss various strategies for clinical implementation.

[What can pulmonary rehabilitation accomplish?] / Was leistet die pneumologische Rehabilitation?

The Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) has stated that pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is the most effective therapeutic intervention to reduce dyspnoea and to improve physical performance and quality of life for patients with obstructive lung disease.New innovative studies raised in the area of PR:1) Pulmonary fibrosis & asthma bronchiale - While PR is recommended for chronic respiratory diseases other than COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) in the respective disease-specific treatment guidelines, PR in some pathologies is underrated. For example, there is a growing body of evidence showing the effectiveness of structured and multidisciplinary PR programs in pulmonary fibrosis and asthma bronchial patients;2) Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 - There is preliminary evidence that COVID-19 patients can benefit from a PR program. The current COVID-19 position paper of the German Respiratory Society e. V. (DGP) regarding PR recommendations suggests that early rehabilitative therapies are already indicated during hospitalisation on the normal or intensive care unit and that rehabilitative interventions should be continued after discharge as a follow-up treatment in PR centres in order to reduce long-term consequences of COVID-19 disease;3) Telehealth meets PR - To further improve the effectiveness of PR in COPD patients using recent technologies, a supplementary "digital exercise program" can contribute to greater benefits compared to PR alone.

Taking Charge: A Proposed Psychological Intervention to Improve Pulmonary Rehabilitation Outcomes for People with COPD.

Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is an important, evidence-based treatment that improves outcomes for people with COPD. Individualized exercise programmes aim to improve exercise capacity; self-management education and psychological support are also provided. Translating increased exercise capacity into sustained behavioural change of increased physical activity is difficult. Other unresolved problems with PR programmes include improving uptake, completion, response and sustaining long-term benefit. We offer a different perspective drawn from clinical experience of PR, quantitative and qualitative studies of singing groups for people with COPD, and stroke rehabilitation research that gives psychological factors a more central role in determining outcomes after PR. We discuss Take Charge; a simple but effective psychological intervention promoting self-management--that could be used as part of a PR programme or in situations where PR was declined or unavailable. This may be particularly relevant now when traditional face-to-face group programmes have been disrupted by COVID-19 precautions.