A behaviour change intervention to reduce sedentary behaviour in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To document the experiences of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who underwent a behaviour change intervention to reduce sedentary behaviour (SB) in a clinical trial. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS: Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews to explore perspectives of the behaviour change intervention and specific intervention components in people with stable COPD on the waitlist for pulmonary rehabilitation. SETTING: Three outpatient pulmonary rehabilitation programmes in Sydney, Australia. INTERVENTIONS: The six-week behaviour change intervention with once weekly contact with a physiotherapist aimed to reduce SB by replacing it with light-intensity physical activity (PA) and by breaking up prolonged SB. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Of 30 participants who completed the behaviour change intervention, interviews were conducted with 13 participants and analysed using the 'capability, opportunity, motivation, behaviour (COM-B)' framework of behaviour change. RESULTS: Intervention components regarded as most helpful by participants were verbal education on health consequences on SB, goal setting, and self-monitoring of, and feedback on, step count using activity trackers. There was a clear preference during goal setting to increase PA rather than to reduce SB. Physical limitations and enjoyment of SB were the most reported barriers to reducing SB. CONCLUSIONS: Goal setting, verbal education, and self-monitoring of, and feedback on step count, were viewed positively by people with COPD and may show promise for reducing SB and increasing PA based on individual preference. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PAPER.

Pulmonary Rehabilitation Using Minimal Equipment for People With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Pulmonary rehabilitation programs that use minimal equipment for exercise training, rather than gymnasium equipment, would enable delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation to a greater number of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The effectiveness of minimal equipment programs in people with COPD is unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the effects of pulmonary rehabilitation using minimal equipment for aerobic and/or resistance training in people with COPD. METHODS: Literature databases were searched up to September 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effect of minimal equipment programs with usual care or with exercise equipment-based programs for exercise capacity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and strength. RESULTS: Nineteen RCTs were included in the review and 14 RCTs were included in the meta-analyses, which reported low to moderate certainty of evidence. Compared with usual care, minimal equipment programs increased 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) by 85 m (95% CI = 37 to 132 m). No difference in 6MWD was observed between minimal equipment and exercise equipment-based programs (14 m, 95% CI = -27 to 56 m). Minimal equipment programs were more effective than usual care for improving HRQoL (standardized mean difference = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.31 to 1.67) and were not different from exercise equipment-based programs for improving upper limb strength (6 N, 95% CI = -2 to 13 N) or lower limb strength (20 N, 95% CI = -30 to 71 N). CONCLUSION: In people with COPD, pulmonary rehabilitation programs using minimal equipment elicit clinically significant improvements in 6MWD and HRQoL and are comparable with exercise equipment-based programs for improving 6MWD and strength. IMPACT: Pulmonary rehabilitation programs using minimal equipment may be a suitable alternative in settings where access to gymnasium equipment is limited. Delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation programs using minimal equipment may improve access to pulmonary rehabilitation worldwide, particularly in rural and remote areas and in developing countries.

Six-week behaviour change intervention to reduce sedentary behaviour in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to determine whether a 6-week behaviour change intervention was more effective than a sham intervention for reducing sedentary behaviour (SB) in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: People with stable COPD on the waitlist for entry into pulmonary rehabilitation were recruited to this multicentre trial with randomisation (independent, concealed allocation) to either an intervention group or sham group, assessor blinding and intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The behaviour change intervention consisted of once weekly sessions for 6 weeks with a physiotherapist to reduce SB through education, guided goals setting and real-time feedback on SB. The sham intervention consisted of once weekly phone calls for 6 weeks to monitor health status. SB was measured continuously over 7 days using thigh-worn accelerometry (activPAL3 micro). The primary outcome was time spent in SB. Participants with at least 4 days of ≥10 hours waking wear time were included in the ITT analysis and those who reported achieving ≥70% of goals to reduce SB or who completed all sham calls were included in a per-protocol analysis. RESULTS: 70 participants were recruited and 65 completed the study (mean±SD age 74±9 years, mean FEV1 55%±19% predicted, 49% male). At 6 weeks, no between-group differences in time spent in SB were observed in the ITT analysis (mean difference 5 min/day, 95% CI -38 to 48) or per-protocol analysis (-16 min/day, 95% CI -80 to 48). DISCUSSION: A 6-week behaviour change intervention did not reduce time in SB compared with a sham intervention in people with stable moderate-to-severe COPD prior to pulmonary rehabilitation.

Low leisure-based sitting time and being physically active were associated with reduced odds of death and diabetes in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a cohort study.

QUESTIONS: In people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), are activity phenotypes (based on physical activity and recreational screen time) associated with mortality and cardiometabolic risk factors? DESIGN: Cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: People with COPD aged≥40years and who were current or ex-smokers were identified from the 2003 Scottish Health Survey. OUTCOME MEASURES: Data were collected regarding demographics, anthropometric measurements, medical history, physical activity, sedentary behaviour, health outcomes, and mortality. ANALYSIS: Participants were categorised into one of the following activity phenotypes: 'couch potatoes' were those who were insufficiently active with high leisure-based sitting time and/or no domestic physical activity; 'light movers' were insufficiently active with some domestic physical activity; 'sedentary exercisers' were sufficiently active with high leisure-based sitting time; and 'busy bees' were sufficiently active with low leisure-based sitting time. 'Sufficiently active' was defined as adhering to physical activity (PA) recommendations of≥7.5 metabolic equivalent (MET) hours/week. 'Low leisure-based sitting time' was defined as≤200minutes of recreational screen time/day. RESULTS: The 584 participants had a mean age of 64 years (SD 12) and 52% were male. Over 5.5 years (SD 1.3) of follow-up, there were 81 all-cause deaths from 433 COPD participants with available data. Compared to the 'couch potatoes', there was a reduced risk of all-cause mortality in the 'busy bees' (Hazard Ratio 0.26, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.65) with a trend towards a reduction in mortality risk in the other phenotypes. The odds of diabetes were lower in the 'busy bees' compared to the 'couch potatoes' (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: Adhering to physical activity guidelines and keeping leisure-based sitting time low had a mortality benefit and lowered the odds of diabetes in people with COPD. [McKeough Z, Cheng SWM, Alison J, Jenkins C, Hamer M, Stamatakis E (2018) Low leisure-based sitting time and being physically active were associated with reduced odds of death and diabetes in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a cohort study. Journal of Physiotherapy 64: 114-120].

Associations of total and type-specific physical activity with mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Regular physical activity is recommended for all people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but the dose of physical activity required to gain mortality benefit in this population is not yet known. This aim of this study was to examine the associations of total and type-specific physical activity with mortality risk in people with COPD. METHODS: People with COPD aged ≥40 years were identified from the 1997 Health Survey for England and the 1998 and 2003 Scottish Health Survey cohorts. Self-reported total physical activity, moderate-vigorous intensity physical activity (MVPA), walking, domestic physical activity, and sport/exercise were assessed at baseline. Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine the associations between physical activity and mortality risk. RESULTS: Two thousand three hundred ninety-eight participants with COPD were included in the analysis and followed up for a mean 8.5 (SD 3.9) years. For both total physical activity and MVPA, we observed dose-response associations with all-cause and cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality risk, and with respiratory mortality risk to a lesser extent. Compared to those who reported no physical activity, participants who met the physical activity guidelines demonstrated the greatest reductions in all-cause (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.45-0.69), CVD (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32-0.71) and respiratory mortality risk (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.24-0.67). Participants who reported a level of physical activity of at least half the dosage recommended by the guidelines also had a reduced risk of all-cause (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56-1.00) and CVD mortality (HR 0.48, 95% CI 0.26-0.88). Dose-response associations with mortality risk were demonstrated for walking and sport/exercise, but not domestic physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: We found a dose-response association between physical activity and all-cause and CVD mortality risk in people with COPD, with protective effects appearing at levels considerably lower than the general physical activity recommendations. People with COPD may benefit from engagement in low levels of physical activity, particularly walking and structured exercise.

A behaviour change intervention to reduce sedentary time in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Replacing sedentary behaviour with light intensity physical activity (ie, activities classified as less than three metabolic equivalents, such as slow-paced walking) may be a more realistic strategy for reducing cardiometabolic risk in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease than only aiming to increase levels of moderate-vigorous intensity physical activity. Behaviour change interventions to reduce sedentary behaviour in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease have not yet been developed or tested. RESEARCH QUESTIONS: Is a 6-week behaviour change intervention effective and feasible in reducing sedentary time in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease? DESIGN: This study will be a multi-centre, randomised, controlled trial with concealed allocation, assessor blinding, and intention-to-treat analysis, comparing a 6-week behaviour change intervention aimed at reducing sedentary time with a sham intervention in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Seventy participants will be recruited from the waiting lists for pulmonary rehabilitation programs at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital and Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia. INTERVENTION: The behaviour change intervention aims to reduce sedentary time through a process of guided goal setting with participants to achieve two target behaviours: (1) replace sitting and lying down with light-intensity physical activity where possible, and (2) stand up and move for 2minutes after 30minutes of continuous sedentary time. Three face-to-face sessions and three phone sessions will be held with a physiotherapist over the 6-week intervention period. The 'capability', 'opportunity', 'motivation' and 'behaviour' (COM-B) model will be applied to each participant to determine which components of behaviour (capability, opportunity or motivation) need to change in order to reduce sedentary time. Based on this 'behavioural diagnosis', the Behaviour Change Wheel will be used to systematically select appropriate behaviour change techniques to assist participants in achieving their weekly goals. Behaviour change techniques will include providing information about the health consequences of sedentary behaviour, self-monitoring and review of weekly goals, problem-solving of barriers to achieving weekly goals, and providing feedback on sedentary time using the Jawbone UP3 activity monitor. CONTROL: The sham intervention will consist of weekly phone calls for 6 weeks, to enquire whether the participants' health status has changed over the intervention period (eg, hospitalised for an acute exacerbation). No instructions regarding physical activity or exercise will be given. MEASUREMENTS: Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, at the end of the 6-week intervention period, and at the 3-month follow-up. Primary outcome measures will be: (1) total sedentary time, including the pattern of accumulation of sedentary time, assessed by the activPAL3 activity monitor, and (2) feasibility of the intervention assessed by uptake and retention of participants, participant compliance, self-reported achievement of weekly goals, and adverse events. Secondary outcome measures will include functional exercise capacity, health-related quality of life, domain-specific and behaviour-specific sedentary time, patient activation, and anxiety and depression. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted with participants who receive the behaviour change intervention to explore acceptability and satisfaction with the different components of the intervention. ANALYSIS: Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) will be used to calculate between-group comparisons of total sedentary time and the number of bouts of sedentary time>30minutes after adjusting baseline values. Uncertainty about the size of the mean between-group differences will be quantified with 95% CI. Within-group comparisons will be examined using paired t-tests and described as mean differences with 95% CIs. Secondary outcome measures will be analysed similarly. The feasibility measures will be analysed descriptively. Semi-structured interviews will be conducted until data saturation is achieved and there are no new emerging themes. De-identified interview transcripts will be coded independently by two researchers and analysed alongside data collection using the COM-B model as a thematic framework. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: If behaviour change interventions are found to be an effective and feasible method for reducing sedentary time, such interventions may be used to reduce cardiometabolic risk in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. An approach that emphasises participation in light-intensity physical activity may increase the confidence and willingness of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease to engage in more intense physical activity, and may serve as an intermediate goal to increase uptake of pulmonary rehabilitation.