The Impact of Patient Preference on Attendance and Completion Rates at Centre-Based and mHealth Pulmonary Rehabilitation: A Non-Inferiority Pragmatic Clinical Trial.

Purpose: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is vital in the management of chronic respiratory disorders (CRDs) although uptake, attendance and completion are poor. Differing models of delivering PR are emerging in an attempt to increase the uptake and completion of this intervention. This study aimed to evaluate participant rate of attendance and completion of PR when given a preference regarding model of delivery (centre-based and mPR). Secondary aims were to evaluate the factors affecting patient preference for model of delivery and determine whether mPR is non-inferior to centre-based PR in health outcomes. Methods: A multi-centre non-inferiority preference based clinical trial in Auckland, New Zealand. Participants with a CRD referred for PR were offered the choice of centre-based or mHealth PR (mPR). The primary outcome was completion rate of chosen intervention. Results: A total of 105 participants were recruited to the study with 67 (64%) preferring centre-based and 38 (36%) mPR. The odds of completing the PR programme were higher in the centre-based group compared to mPR (odds ratio 1.90 95% CI [0.83-4.35]). Participants opting for mPR were significantly younger (p = 0.002) and significantly more likely to be working (p = 0.0001). Results showed that mPR was not inferior to centre-based regarding changes in symptom scores (CAT) or time spent in sedentary behaviour (SBQ). When services were forced to transition to telehealth services during COVID-19 restrictions, the attendance and completion rates were higher with telephone calls and video conferencing compared to mPR - suggesting that synchronous interpersonal interactions with clinicians may facilitate the best attendance and completion rates. Conclusion: When offered the choice of PR delivery method, the majority of participants preferred centre-based PR and this facilitated the best completion rates. mPR was the preferred choice for younger, working participants suggesting that mPR may offer a viable alternative to centre-based PR for some participants, especially younger, employed participants.

Characteristics of pulmonary rehabilitation programmes in New Zealand: a survey of practice prior to and during COVID-19.

AIM: The primary aim of this survey was to develop an understanding of current pulmonary rehabilitation practices in New Zealand. The onset of a COVID-19 lockdown in New Zealand in March 2020, shortly after completion of the initial survey, enabled a follow-up survey to determine how services had adapted in response to the global pandemic. METHODS: A cross-sectional observational design using two sequential purpose designed online surveys administered before (Survey 1) and after COVID-19 lockdowns (Survey 2) in New Zealand. RESULTS: Survey 1 was completed by 36 PR services across New Zealand and showed homogeneity in the content and structure of services provided. PR was primarily funded by district health boards, run by a multi-disciplinary team of health professionals and included participants with a range of chronic respiratory conditions. All programmes completed pre- and post-PR assessments, were a minimum of eight weeks in duration and included exercise and education. Survey 2 showed that, during level 4 and level 3 COVID-19 restrictions, 11 (40.7%) of services paused PR programmes, with 16 (59%) adapting the service to provide home-based rehabilitation via telephone or teleconference facilities. CONCLUSION: PR programmes in New Zealand report following Australian and New Zealand PR best practice guidelines and are homogenous in content and structure, but COVID-19 restrictions highlighted the need for services to provide more diverse options for service delivery. Future service development should focus on providing a range of delivery options allowing increased access to PR, tailoring therapy to meet individual needs and ensuring services are engaging for all participants to optimise participation.

Patient characteristics and predictors of completion of a pulmonary rehabilitation programme in Auckland, New Zealand.

AIM: Chronic respiratory diseases, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, are a worldwide public health problem. Pulmonary rehabilitation is a gold-standard intervention for these diseases, yet attendance and completion rates are poor. Counties Manukau Health, in Auckland, New Zealand, has a high prevalence of chronic respiratory disease and a culturally diverse population, comprising large numbers of Maori and Pacific Island people, who are known to be disproportionately affected by chronic respiratory disease. The aim of this study was to investigate patient characteristics affecting engagement with the Counties Manukau Health pulmonary rehabilitation programme and identify factors predicting completion of the programme. METHODS: Investigators performed a retrospective analysis using routinely collected data of 2,756 patients invited to attend the pulmonary rehabilitation programme at Counties Manukau Health. Data were analysed to compare demographic and clinical outcomes of patients who completed, did not complete or did not attend the programme, and identified factors predicting completion. RESULTS: Significant differences were found between groups in demographic and clinical characteristics. Increasing age, higher six-minute walk test distance at programme commencement and European ethnicity were significant predictors of completion of the PR programme. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to European people, Maori were 52% less likely and Pacific Island people were 40% less likely to complete the programme. These findings are significant for the Counties Manukau Health population. Further work needs to focus on determining how to make programmes more engaging to different cultures and how we can aim to reduce health inequities in these populations.

Understanding End-User Perspectives of Mobile Pulmonary Rehabilitation (mPR): Cross-Sectional Survey and Interviews.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is an effective intervention for the management of people with chronic respiratory diseases, but the uptake of and adherence to PR programs is low. There is potential for mobile health (mHealth) to provide an alternative modality for the delivery of PR, overcoming many of the barriers contributing to poor attendance to current services. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to understand the needs, preferences, and priorities of end users for the development of an adaptive mobile PR (mPR) support program. METHODS: A mixed methods (qualitative and quantitative) approach was used to assess the needs, preferences, and priorities of the end users (ie, patients with chronic respiratory disorders) and key stakeholders (ie, clinicians working with patients with chronic respiratory disorders and running PR). The formative studies included the following: (1) a survey to understand the preferences and priorities of patients for PR and how mobile technology could be used to provide PR support, (2) ethnographic semistructured interviews with patients with chronic respiratory disorders to gain perspectives on their understanding of their health and potential features that could be included in an mPR program, and (3) key informant interviews with health care providers to understand the needs, preferences, and priorities for the development of an mPR support program. RESULTS: Across all formative studies (patient survey, n=30; patient interviews, n=8; and key stakeholder interviews, n=8), the participants were positive about the idea of an mPR program but raised concerns related to digital literacy and confidence in using technology, access to technology, and loss of social support currently gained from traditional programs. Key stakeholders highlighted the need for patient safety to be maintained and ensuring appropriate programs for different groups within the population. Finding a balance between ensuring safety and maximizing access was seen to be essential in the success of an mPR program. CONCLUSIONS: These formative studies found high interest in mHealth-based PR intervention and detailed the potential for an mPR program to overcome current barriers to accessing traditional PR programs. Key considerations and features were identified, including the importance of technology access and digital literacy being considered in utilizing technology with this population.

Australian and New Zealand Pulmonary Rehabilitation Guidelines.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of the Pulmonary Rehabilitation Guidelines (Guidelines) is to provide evidence-based recommendations for the practice of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) specific to Australian and New Zealand healthcare contexts. METHODS: The Guideline methodology adhered to the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II criteria. Nine key questions were constructed in accordance with the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome) format and reviewed by a COPD consumer group for appropriateness. Systematic reviews were undertaken for each question and recommendations made with the strength of each recommendation based on the GRADE (Gradings of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria. The Guidelines were externally reviewed by a panel of experts. RESULTS: The Guideline panel recommended that patients with mild-to-severe COPD should undergo PR to improve quality of life and exercise capacity and to reduce hospital admissions; that PR could be offered in hospital gyms, community centres or at home and could be provided irrespective of the availability of a structured education programme; that PR should be offered to patients with bronchiectasis, interstitial lung disease and pulmonary hypertension, with the latter in specialized centres. The Guideline panel was unable to make recommendations relating to PR programme length beyond 8 weeks, the optimal model for maintenance after PR, or the use of supplemental oxygen during exercise training. The strength of each recommendation and the quality of the evidence are presented in the summary. CONCLUSION: The Australian and New Zealand Pulmonary Rehabilitation Guidelines present an evaluation of the evidence for nine PICO questions, with recommendations to provide guidance for clinicians and policymakers.