Providing choice in pulmonary rehabilitation

ABSTRACT

Introduction/Aim: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a vital component in the management of chronic respiratory disorders (CRDs). New models of delivering PR are emerging to increase the uptake and completion of this important intervention. The aim of this study is to evaluate participant rate of attendance to PR delivered via two different delivery modes (centre based and mobile technology (mPR)). Secondary aims are to evaluate the patient preference for mode of delivery, and if mPR is non -inferior to centre-based PR in health outcomes. Method(s) A multi-centre, two-arm parallel preference based clinical trial was conducted. Participants with a chronic respiratory disorder referred for PR were offered the choice of centre-based or web-based (mPR) PR. Both programmes were 8 weeks in duration. The primary outcome was attendance. Result(s) 105 participants were recruited to the study with 67 opting for centre-based and 38 preferring web-based PR (mPR). The attendance rate was higher in the centre-based group than mPR. Results showed mPR was not inferior in terms of changes in symptom scores (CAT) or time spent in sedentary behaviour (SBQ) but inferiority could not be confirmed for changes in dyspnoea scores (mMRC) or health related quality of life (EQ5D-3L). Changes in exercise capacity could not be determined due to COVID-19 restrictions. Conclusion(s) This pragmatic study has shown that mPR was preferred by 38% of participants and a significant percentage were younger, working, with higher education inferring the demand will likely increase over time. The attendance rate with mPR was lower than anticipated. Further research with larger sample size is required to assess efficacy of mPR.