Impact of Test Instructions on 6-min Walk Distance in Adults With Chronic Respiratory Disease: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL.

PURPOSE: The 6-min walk test (6MWT) is commonly used to assess functional exercise capacity in people with chronic respiratory disease in both clinical and research settings. However, two tests are required to achieve accurate results, due to a well-documented learning effect for the 6-min walk distance (6MWD). Whether it is possible to reduce or eliminate the learning effect by optimizing 6MWT instructions is not known. METHODS: People with chronic respiratory disease referred to pulmonary rehabilitation undertook two 6MWT with random allocation to modified instructions ( fast -walk as fast as possible; n = 46) or usual instructions ( far -walk as far as possible; n = 49). The primary outcome was the learning effect, defined as the difference in the 6MWD between test one and test two. Subgroup analyses investigated whether effects varied in those who were naïve to the 6MWT or according to diagnosis (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, interstitial lung disease, and bronchiectasis). RESULTS: A learning effect was present in both groups, with a mean improvement in the 6MWD on the second test of 14 m in the fast (modified) group (95% CI, 6-22) and 11 m in the far (usual) group (95% CI, 4-19). There was no statistically or clinically significant difference between groups in the magnitude of the learning effect (between-group difference -3 m, 95% CI, -14 to 8). There was no significant effect of naivety to the 6MWT or diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The current recommended procedures for the 6MWT, including standardized instructions and performance of two tests on each occasion, should be retained.

Muscle energy technique for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A feasibility study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of implementing a manual therapy technique (muscle energy technique, MET) protocol in a hospital pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) program for patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Please cite this article as: Baxter DA, Coyle ME, Hill CJ, Worsnop C, Shergis JL. Muscle energy technique for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A feasibility study. J Integr Med. 2023; 21(3): 245-253. METHODS: Participants aged 40 years and over, with moderate to severe COPD, were recruited into this 12-week study. The primary outcome measures were feasibility (acceptability of the intervention and attendance/adherence to the trial) and safety (adverse events, AEs). All participants received the MET and PR therapies. Participants and assessors were unblinded. Semi-standardized MET was delivered on 6 occasions (a maximum of once per week) at the hospital directly before a PR session. Participants undertook PR sessions as per the hospital program at a frequency of two days per week for 8 weeks. Participants were contacted 4 weeks after their final MET treatment via a telephone call to assess acceptability of the intervention. RESULTS: Thirty-three participants were enrolled, with a median age of 74 years (range 45-89 years). The median number of MET sessions that participants attended was 5 (range 0-6) out of a possible 6 sessions (83% attendance). At follow-up, participants overwhelmingly enjoyed the MET treatment with some subjectively reporting improved breathing. There were no major AEs related to the intervention, with the majority of AEs classified as expected events related to COPD exacerbations. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to implement a manual therapy protocol using MET as an adjunct to PR in a hospital setting. Recruitment rates were satisfactory and there were no AEs related to the MET component of the intervention.

Prescribing walking training in interstitial lung disease from the 6-minute walk test.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Endurance training during PR requires exercise prescription at sufficient intensity to achieve physiological benefits. This analysis sought to investigate whether walking training prescribed from 6-minute walk test (6MWT) average speed provides an appropriate training intensity for people with ILD during PR. METHODS: Individuals with ILD completed cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) and 6MWT in random order. A 10-minute constant speed treadmill walk test (10MTW) was undertaken at 80% of the average 6MWT speed. Oxygen uptake (VO2) was measured during all tests. Percentage VO2peak during 10MTW was main outcome measure. RESULTS: Eleven people with ILD (age 71 (8) years; forced vital capacity 73 (18) %predicted, 6-minute walk distance 481 (99) meters, and VO2peak during CPET 1.3 (0.2) L.min-1) undertook testing. Average VO2peak during 10MTW was 91 (18) % of CPET VO2peak [range 67-116%]. Participants who achieved a greater VO2peak during CPET walked at a smaller %VO2peak during 10MTW (r = -0.6; p = .04). CONCLUSIONS: For people with ILD, walking training prescribed at 80% of 6MWT average speed can provide adequate exercise training intensity for PR.

Perceived Autonomy Support in Telerehabilitation by People With Chronic Respiratory Disease: A Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Autonomy-supportive health environments can assist patients in achieving behavior change and can influence adherence positively. Telerehabilitation may increase access to rehabilitation services, but creating an autonomy-supportive environment may be challenging. RESEARCH QUESTION: To what degree does telerehabilitation provide an autonomy-supportive environment? What is the patient experience of an 8-week telerehabilitation program? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Individuals undertaking telerehabilitation or center-based pulmonary rehabilitation within a larger randomized controlled equivalence trial completed the Health Care Climate Questionnaire (HCCQ; short form) to assess perceived autonomy support. Telerehabilitation participants were invited 1:1 to undertake semistructured interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded thematically to identify major themes and subthemes. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-six participants (n = 69 telerehabilitation) completed the HCCQ and 30 telerehabilitation participants (42%) undertook interviews. HCCQ summary scores indicated that participants strongly agreed that the telerehabilitation environment was autonomy supportive, which was similar to center-based participants (HCCQ summary score, P = .6; individual HCCQ items, P ≥ .3). Telerehabilitation interview data supported quantitative findings identifying five major themes, with subthemes, as follows: (1) making it easier to participate in pulmonary rehabilitation, because telerehabilitation was convenient, saved time and money, and offered flexibility; (2) receiving support in a variety of ways, including opportunities for peer support and receiving an individualized program guided by expert staff; (3) internal and external motivation to exercise as a consequence of being in a supervised group, seeing results for effort, and being inspired by others; (4) achieving success through provision of equipment and processes to prepare and support operation of equipment and technology; and (5) after the rehabilitation program, continuing to exercise, but dealing with feelings of loss. INTERPRETATION: Telerehabilitation was perceived as an autonomy-supportive environment, in part by making it easier to undertake pulmonary rehabilitation. Support for behavior change, understanding, and motivation were derived from clinicians and patient-peers. The extent to which autonomy support translates into ongoing self-management and behavior change is not clear. TRIAL REGISTRY: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; No.: ACTRN12616000360415; URL: https://anzctr.org.au/.

Telerehabilitation for chronic respiratory disease: a randomised controlled equivalence trial.

RATIONALE: Pulmonary rehabilitation is an effective treatment for people with chronic respiratory disease but is delivered to <5% of eligible individuals. This study investigated whether home-based telerehabilitation was equivalent to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation in people with chronic respiratory disease. METHODS: A multicentre randomised controlled trial with assessor blinding, powered for equivalence was undertaken. Individuals with a chronic respiratory disease referred to pulmonary rehabilitation at four participating sites (one rural) were eligible and randomised using concealed allocation to pulmonary rehabilitation or telerehabilitation. Both programmes were two times per week for 8 weeks. The primary outcome was change in Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire Dyspnoea (CRQ-D) domain at end-rehabilitation, with a prespecified equivalence margin of 2.5 points. Follow-up was at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included exercise capacity, health-related quality of life, symptoms, self-efficacy and psychological well-being. RESULTS: 142 participants were randomised to pulmonary rehabilitation or telerehabilitation with 96% and 97% included in the intention-to-treat analysis, respectively. There were no significant differences between groups for any outcome at either time point. Both groups achieved meaningful improvement in dyspnoea and exercise capacity at end-rehabilitation. However, we were unable to confirm equivalence of telerehabilitation for the primary outcome ΔCRQ-D at end-rehabilitation (mean difference (MD) (95% CI) -1 point (-3 to 1)), and inferiority of telerehabilitation could not be excluded at either time point (12-month follow-up: MD -1 point (95% CI -4 to 1)). At end-rehabilitation, telerehabilitation demonstrated equivalence for 6-minute walk distance (MD -6 m, 95% CI -26 to 15) with possibly superiority of telerehabilitation at 12 months (MD 14 m, 95% CI -10 to 38). CONCLUSION: telerehabilitation may not be equivalent to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation for all outcomes, but is safe and achieves clinically meaningful benefits. When centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation is not available, telerehabilitation may provide an alternative programme model. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACtelerehabilitationN12616000360415.

High intensity interval training versus moderate intensity continuous training for people with interstitial lung disease: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Interstitial lung disease is a debilitating condition associated with significant dyspnoea, fatigue, and poor exercise tolerance. Pulmonary rehabilitation is an effective and key intervention in people with interstitial lung disease. However, despite the best efforts of patients and clinicians, many of those who participate are not achieving clinically meaningful benefits. This assessor-blinded, multi-centre, randomised controlled trial aims to compare the clinical benefits of high intensity interval exercise training versus the standard pulmonary rehabilitation method of continuous training at moderate intensity in people with fibrotic interstitial lung disease. METHODS: Eligible participants will be randomised to either a standard pulmonary rehabilitation group using moderate intensity continuous exercise training or high intensity interval exercise training. Participants in both groups will undertake an 8-week pulmonary rehabilitation program of twice-weekly supervised exercise training including aerobic (cycling) and strengthening exercises. In addition, participants in both groups will be prescribed a home exercise program. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, upon completion of the intervention and at six months following the intervention by a blinded assessor. The primary outcome is endurance time on a constant work rate test. Secondary outcomes are functional capacity (6-min walk distance), health-related quality of life (Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis specific version (SGRQ-I), breathlessness (Dyspnoea 12, Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale), fatigue (fatigue severity scale), anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), physical activity level (GeneActiv), skeletal muscle changes (ultrasonography) and completion and adherence to pulmonary rehabilitation. DISCUSSION: The standard exercise training strategies used in pulmonary rehabilitation may not provide an optimal exercise training stimulus for people with interstitial lung disease. This study will determine whether high intensity interval training can produce equivalent or even superior changes in exercise performance and symptoms. If high intensity interval training proves effective, it will provide an exercise training strategy that can readily be implemented into clinical practice for people with interstitial lung disease. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03800914). Registered 11 January 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03800914 Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12619000019101. Registered 9 January 2019, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=376050&isReview=true.

Pulmonary rehabilitation for interstitial lung disease.

BACKGROUND: Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is characterised by reduced functional capacity, dyspnoea and exercise-induced hypoxia. Pulmonary rehabilitation is often used to improve symptoms, health-related quality of life and functional status in other chronic lung conditions. There is accumulating evidence for comparable effects of pulmonary rehabilitation in people with ILD. However, further information is needed to clarify the long-term benefit and to strengthen the rationale for pulmonary rehabilitation to be incorporated into standard clinical management of people with ILD. This review updates the results reported in 2014. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether pulmonary rehabilitation in people with ILD has beneficial effects on exercise capacity, symptoms, quality of life and survival compared with no pulmonary rehabilitation in people with ILD. To assess the safety of pulmonary rehabilitation in people with ILD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCO) and PEDro from inception to April 2020. We searched the reference lists of relevant studies, international clinical trial registries and respiratory conference abstracts to look for qualifying studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised controlled trials in which pulmonary rehabilitation was compared with no pulmonary rehabilitation or with other therapy in people with ILD of any origin. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We contacted study authors to request missing data and information regarding adverse effects. We specified a priori subgroup analyses for participants with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) and participants with severe lung disease (low diffusing capacity or desaturation during exercise). There were insufficient data to perform the prespecified subgroup analysis for type of exercise training modality. MAIN RESULTS: For this update, we included an additional 12 studies resulting in a total of 21 studies. We included 16 studies in the meta-analysis (356 participants undertook pulmonary rehabilitation and 319 were control participants). The mean age of participants ranged from 36 to 72 years and included people with ILD of varying aetiology, sarcoidosis or IPF (with mean transfer factor of carbon dioxide (TLCO) % predicted ranging from 37% to 63%). Most pulmonary rehabilitation programmes were conducted in an outpatient setting, with a small number conducted in home-based, inpatient or tele-rehabilitation settings. The duration of pulmonary rehabilitation ranged from three to 48 weeks. There was a moderate risk of bias due to the absence of outcome assessor blinding and intention-to-treat analyses and the inadequate reporting of randomisation and allocation procedures in 60% of the studies. Pulmonary rehabilitation probably improves the six-minute walk distance (6MWD) with mean difference (MD) of 40.07 metres, 95% confidence interval (CI) 32.70 to 47.44; 585 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There may be improvements in peak workload (MD 9.04 watts, 95% CI 6.07 to 12.0; 159 participants; low-certainty evidence), peak oxygen consumption (MD 1.28 mL/kg/minute, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.05; 94 participants; low-certainty evidence) and maximum ventilation (MD 7.21 L/minute, 95% CI 4.10 to 10.32; 94 participants; low-certainty evidence). In the subgroup of participants with IPF, there were comparable improvements in 6MWD (MD 37.25 metres, 95% CI 26.16 to 48.33; 278 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), peak workload (MD 9.94 watts, 95% CI 6.39 to 13.49; low-certainty evidence), VO2 (oxygen uptake) peak (MD 1.45 mL/kg/minute, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.40; low-certainty evidence) and maximum ventilation (MD 9.80 L/minute, 95% CI 6.06 to 13.53; 62 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effect of pulmonary rehabilitation on maximum heart rate was uncertain. Pulmonary rehabilitation may reduce dyspnoea in participants with ILD (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.36, 95% CI -0.58 to -0.14; 348 participants; low-certainty evidence) and in the IPF subgroup (SMD -0.41, 95% CI -0.74 to -0.09; 155 participants; low-certainty evidence). Pulmonary rehabilitation probably improves health-related quality of life: there were improvements in all four domains of the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ) and the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) for participants with ILD and for the subgroup of people with IPF. The improvement in SGRQ Total score was -9.29 for participants with ILD (95% CI -11.06 to -7.52; 478 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and -7.91 for participants with IPF (95% CI -10.55 to -5.26; 194 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Five studies reported longer-term outcomes, with improvements in exercise capacity, dyspnoea and health-related quality of life still evident six to 12 months following the intervention period (6MWD: MD 32.43, 95% CI 15.58 to 49.28; 297 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; dyspnoea: MD -0.29, 95% CI -0.49 to -0.10; 335 participants; SGRQ Total score: MD -4.93, 95% CI -7.81 to -2.06; 240 participants; low-certainty evidence). In the subgroup of participants with IPF, there were improvements at six to 12 months following the intervention for dyspnoea and SGRQ Impact score. The effect of pulmonary rehabilitation on survival at long-term follow-up is uncertain. There were insufficient data to allow examination of the impact of disease severity or exercise training modality. Ten studies provided information on adverse events; however, there were no adverse events reported during rehabilitation. Four studies reported the death of one pulmonary rehabilitation participant; however, all four studies indicated this death was unrelated to the intervention received. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Pulmonary rehabilitation can be performed safely in people with ILD. Pulmonary rehabilitation probably improves functional exercise capacity, dyspnoea and quality of life in the short term, with benefits also probable in IPF. Improvements in functional exercise capacity, dyspnoea and quality of life were sustained longer term. Dyspnoea and quality of life may be sustained in people with IPF. The certainty of evidence was low to moderate, due to inadequate reporting of methods, the lack of outcome assessment blinding and heterogeneity in some results. Further well-designed randomised trials are needed to determine the optimal exercise prescription, and to investigate ways to promote longer-lasting improvements, particularly for people with IPF.

Community Participation by People with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Little is known regarding community participation in individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of this study was to explore community participation in individuals with COPD and to determine whether there is an association between community participation and activity-related outcome variables commonly collected during pulmonary rehabilitation assessment. We also sought to investigate which of these variables might influence community participation in people with COPD. Ninety-nine individuals with COPD were enrolled (67 ± 9 years, FEV1: 55 ± 22% predicted). We assessed community participation (Community Participation Indicator (CPI) and European Social Survey (ESS) for formal and informal community participation), daily physical activity levels (activity monitor), exercise capacity (6-minute walk test), breathlessness (Modified Medical Research Council, MMRC scale), self-efficacy (Pulmonary Rehabilitation Adapted Index of Self-Efficacy) and anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale). Higher levels of community participation on the CPI were associated with older age and greater levels of physical activity (total, light and moderate-to-vigorous) (all rs = 0.30, p < 0.05). Older age and more moderate-to-vigorous physical activity independently predicted greater community participation measured by CPI. Higher levels of depression symptoms were associated with less formal and informal community participation on ESS (rs = -0.25). More formal community participation on ESS was weakly (rs = 0.2-0.3) associated with older age, better lung function, exercise capacity and self-efficacy, and less breathlessness. Self-efficacy, exercise capacity, and age independently predicted formal community participation in individuals with COPD. Strategies to optimize self-efficacy and improve exercise capacity may be useful to enhance community participation in people with COPD.

Perceptions and experiences of a manual therapy trial: a qualitative study of people with moderate to severe COPD.

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) presents with physical, emotional and social difficulties that affect quality of life. Multimodal management includes both pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies, and pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) plays an important role. Recent research has suggested that manual therapies may improve perceptions of dyspnea for people with COPD. METHODS: Focus group interviews were conducted as part of a mixed methods study to assess the feasibility of implementing a manual therapy technique-muscle energy technique (MET)-as an adjunct to PR for people with moderate to severe COPD. Focus group interviews were conducted to examine trial participants views of the intervention and the trial design. A thematic analysis was undertaken to explore the data. RESULTS: Twelve participants with moderate to severe COPD participated in three focus groups. Participants were motivated to participate in the trial to be proactive about their health. They perceived MET to be a gentle, comfortable form of stretching that allowed them to 'breathe easier' and prepared them for PR. A small number of participants reported mild muscular discomfort during MET, but this was short-lasting and was not bothersome. Participants enjoyed the one-on-one contact with researchers and learned more about their breathing while performing spirometric testing. Most participants wanted longer and more frequent MET sessions, and some requested 'homework' stretching exercises. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study show that a manual therapy intervention was received well by participants in a clinical trial setting. A small number of participants reported mild musculoskeletal discomfort in relation to the MET treatment. Participant preferences for additional and longer treatment sessions should be carefully considered against available resources in future clinical trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR, ACTRN12618000801213. Registered 11 May 2018 - Retrospectively registered. http://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=374643&isReview=true.

"Willingness to Pay": The Value Attributed to Program Location by Pulmonary Rehabilitation Participants.

The "contingent valuation" method is used to quantify the value of services not available in traditional markets, by assessing the monetary value an individual ascribes to the benefit provided by an intervention. The aim of this study was to determine preferences for home or center-based pulmonary rehabilitation for participants with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) using the "willingness to pay" (WTP) approach, the most widely used technique to elicit strengths of individual preferences. This is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled equivalence trial comparing center-based and home-based pulmonary rehabilitation. At their final session, participants were asked to nominate the maximum that they would be willing to pay to undertake home-based pulmonary rehabilitation in preference to a center-based program. Regression analyses were used to investigate relationships between participant features and WTP values. Data were available for 141/163 eligible study participants (mean age 69 [SD 10] years, n = 82 female). In order to undertake home-based pulmonary rehabilitation in preference to a conventional center-based program, participants were willing to pay was mean $AUD176 (SD 255) (median $83 [IQR 0 to 244]). No significant difference for WTP values was observed between groups (p = 0.98). A WTP value above zero was related to home ownership (odds ratio [OR] 2.95, p = 0.02) and worse baseline SF-36 physical component score (OR 0.94, p = 0.02). This preliminary evidence for WTP in the context of pulmonary rehabilitation indicated the need for further exploration of preferences for treatment location in people with COPD to inform new models of service delivery.

Telerehabilitation for chronic respiratory disease.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation is a proven, effective intervention for people with chronic respiratory diseases including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), interstitial lung disease (ILD) and bronchiectasis. However, relatively few people attend or complete a program, due to factors including a lack of programs, issues associated with travel and transport, and other health issues. Traditionally, pulmonary rehabilitation is delivered in-person on an outpatient basis at a hospital or other healthcare facility (referred to as centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation). Newer, alternative modes of pulmonary rehabilitation delivery include home-based models and the use of telehealth. Telerehabilitation is the delivery of rehabilitation services at a distance, using information and communication technology. To date, there has not been a comprehensive assessment of the clinical efficacy or safety of telerehabilitation, or its ability to improve uptake and access to rehabilitation services, for people with chronic respiratory disease. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of telerehabilitation for people with chronic respiratory disease. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials; six databases including MEDLINE and Embase; and three trials registries, up to 30 November 2020. We checked reference lists of all included studies for additional references, and handsearched relevant respiratory journals and meeting abstracts. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials of telerehabilitation for the delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation were eligible for inclusion. The telerehabilitation intervention was required to include exercise training, with at least 50% of the rehabilitation intervention being delivered by telerehabilitation. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methods recommended by Cochrane. We assessed the risk of bias for all studies, and used the ROBINS-I tool to assess bias in non-randomised controlled clinical trials. We assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE. Comparisons were telerehabilitation compared to traditional in-person (centre-based) pulmonary rehabilitation, and telerehabilitation compared to no rehabilitation. We analysed studies of telerehabilitation for maintenance rehabilitation separately from trials of telerehabilitation for initial primary pulmonary rehabilitation. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 15 studies (32 reports) with 1904 participants, using five different models of telerehabilitation. Almost all (99%) participants had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Three studies were controlled clinical trials. For primary pulmonary rehabilitation, there was probably little or no difference between telerehabilitation and in-person pulmonary rehabilitation for exercise capacity measured as 6-Minute Walking Distance (6MWD) (mean difference (MD) 0.06 metres (m), 95% confidence interval (CI) -10.82 m to 10.94 m; 556 participants; four studies; moderate-certainty evidence). There may also be little or no difference for quality of life measured with the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score (MD -1.26, 95% CI -3.97 to 1.45; 274 participants; two studies; low-certainty evidence), or for breathlessness on the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) dyspnoea domain score (MD 0.13, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.40; 426 participants; three studies; low-certainty evidence). Participants were more likely to complete a program of telerehabilitation, with a 93% completion rate (95% CI 90% to 96%), compared to a 70% completion rate for in-person rehabilitation. When compared to no rehabilitation control, trials of primary telerehabilitation may increase exercise capacity on 6MWD (MD 22.17 m, 95% CI -38.89 m to 83.23 m; 94 participants; two studies; low-certainty evidence) and may also increase 6MWD when delivered as maintenance rehabilitation (MD 78.1 m, 95% CI 49.6 m to 106.6 m; 209 participants; two studies; low-certainty evidence). No adverse effects of telerehabilitation were noted over and above any reported for in-person rehabilitation or no rehabilitation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review suggests that primary pulmonary rehabilitation, or maintenance rehabilitation, delivered via telerehabilitation for people with chronic respiratory disease achieves outcomes similar to those of traditional centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation, with no safety issues identified. However, the certainty of the evidence provided by this review is limited by the small number of studies, of varying telerehabilitation models, with relatively few participants. Future research should consider the clinical effect of telerehabilitation for individuals with chronic respiratory diseases other than COPD, the duration of benefit of telerehabilitation beyond the period of the intervention, and the economic cost of telerehabilitation.

Use of supplemental oxygen during exercise testing and training for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a survey of Australian pulmonary rehabilitation programs.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were to determine, in Australian pulmonary rehabilitation programs for people with COPD: (1) whether oxygen saturation (SpO2) was monitored during exercise testing; (2) whether supplemental oxygen was available during exercise testing and/or training; (3) whether oxygen was prescribed during exercise training; and the reason for providing oxygen; (4) whether a protocol was available for supplemental oxygen prescription during exercise training. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional multi-center study using a purposed-designed survey. De-identified survey data were analyzed and the absolute number and percentage of responses were recorded for each question. RESULTS: The survey was sent to 261 pulmonary rehabilitation programs and 142 surveys (54%) were available for analysis. Oxygen saturation was monitored during exercise testing in 92% of programs. Supplemental oxygen was available in the majority of programs during exercise testing (82%) and training (84%). The rationale cited by 87 programs (73%) for prescribing oxygen during exercise training was maintaining SpO2 above a threshold ranging from SpO2 80-88%. Forty-five (32%) programs had a protocol for oxygen prescription during exercise training. CONCLUSION: While monitoring of SpO2 during exercise testing and using supplemental oxygen during testing and training is common in Australian pulmonary rehabilitation programs, few programs had a protocol in place for the prescription of supplemental oxygen for people with COPD who were not on long-term oxygen therapy. This may be due to lack of strong evidence to support the use of supplemental oxygen during exercise training.

The Impact of Pulmonary Rehabilitation on 24-Hour Movement Behavior in People With Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: New Insights From a Compositional Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Physical activity levels are low in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and there is limited knowledge about how pulmonary rehabilitation transforms movement behaviors. This study analyzed data from a pulmonary rehabilitation trial and identified determinants of movement behaviors. METHODS: Objectively assessed time in daily movement behaviors (sleep, sedentary, light-intensity physical activity, and moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity) from a randomized controlled trial (n = 73 participants) comparing home- and center-based pulmonary rehabilitation was analyzed using conventional and compositional analytical approaches. Regression analysis was used to assess relationships between movement behaviors, participant features, and response to the interventions. RESULTS: Compositional analysis revealed no significant differences in movement profiles between the home- and center-based groups. At end rehabilitation, conventional analyses identified positive relationships between exercise capacity (6-min walk distance), light-intensity physical activity, and moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity time. Compositional analyses identified positive relationships between a 6-minute walk distance and moderate- to vigorous-intensity physical activity time, accompanied by negative relationships with sleep and sedentary time (relative to other time components) and novel relationships between body mass index and light-intensity physical activity/sedentary time. CONCLUSION: Compositional analyses following pulmonary rehabilitation identified unique associations between movement behaviors that were not evident in conventional analyses.

Comparison of self-report and administrative data sources to capture health care resource use in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease following pulmonary rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: The optimal method to collect accurate healthcare utilisation data in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is not well established. The aim of this study was to determine feasibility and compare self-report and administrative data sources to capture health care resource use in people with COPD for 12 months following pulmonary rehabilitation. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a randomised controlled equivalence trial comparing centre-based and home-based pulmonary rehabilitation. Healthcare utilisation data were collected for 12 months following pulmonary rehabilitation from self-report (monthly telephone questionnaires and diaries) and administrative sources (Medicare Benefits Schedule, medical records). Feasibility was assessed by the proportion of self-reports completed and accuracy was established using month-by-month and per participant comparison of self-reports with administrative data. RESULTS: Data were available for 145/163 eligible study participants (89%, mean age 69 (SD 9) years, mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s 51 (SD 19) % predicted; n = 83 male). For 1725 months where data collection was possible, 1160 (67%) telephone questionnaires and 331 (19%) diaries were completed. Accuracy of recall varied according to type of health care encounter and self-report method, being higher for telephone questionnaire report of emergency department presentation (Kappa 0.656, p < 0.001; specificity 99%, sensitivity 59%) and hospital admission (Kappa 0.669, p < 0.001; specificity 97%, sensitivity 68%) and lower for general practitioner (Kappa 0.400, p < 0.001; specificity 62%, sensitivity 78%) and medical specialist appointments (Kappa 0.458, p < 0.001; specificity 88%, sensitivity 58%). A wide variety of non-medical encounters were reported (allied health and nursing) which were not captured in administrative data. CONCLUSION: For self-reported methods of healthcare utilisation in people with COPD following pulmonary rehabilitation, monthly telephone questionnaires were more frequently completed and more accurate than diaries. Compared to administrative records, self-reports of emergency department presentations and inpatient admissions were more accurate than for general practitioner and medical specialist appointments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01423227 at clinicaltrials.gov.

The Impact of COPD Exacerbations in the Year Following Pulmonary Rehabilitation: Secondary Analysis of a Randomised Controlled Trial.

Background: Pulmonary rehabilitation is an effective treatment for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but its benefits are poorly maintained. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of COPD exacerbations in the year following pulmonary rehabilitation on outcomes at 12 months. Methods: This was a secondary analysis from a trial of home versus hospital-based rehabilitation in COPD, with 12 months of follow-up. Moderate and severe exacerbations were identified using administrative data (prescriptions) and hospital records (admissions) respectively. The impact of exacerbations at 12 months following pulmonary rehabilitation was evaluated for quality of life (Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire, CRQ), dyspnea (modified Medical Research Council, mMRC), exercise capacity (6-minute walk distance, 6MWD) and objectively measured physical activity (moderate-to-vigorous physical activity, MVPA). Results: A total of 166 participants were included, with mean age (SD) 69 (9) years and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) 49 (19)% predicted. Moderate exacerbations occurred in 68% and severe exacerbations in 34% of participants. Experiencing a severe exacerbation was an independent predictor of worse 12-month outcomes for CRQ (total, fatigue and emotional function domains), mMRC, 6MWD and MVPA (all p<0.05). Participants who completed pulmonary rehabilitation were less likely to have a severe exacerbation (29% vs 48%, p=0.02). Severe exacerbations were more likely in those with worse baseline CRQ total (odds ratio 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.99) and FEV1%predicted (0.98, 95% CI 0.96 to 0.99). Conclusion: Severe exacerbations occur frequently following pulmonary rehabilitation and predict worse 12-month outcomes. Strategies to maintain the benefits of pulmonary rehabilitation should address exacerbation prevention and management.

Home-based pulmonary rehabilitation for COPD using minimal resources: An economic analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of home and centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation for adults with stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). METHODS: Prospective economic analyses were undertaken from a health system perspective alongside a randomized controlled equivalence trial in which participants referred to pulmonary rehabilitation undertook a standard 8-week outpatient centre-based or a new home-based programme. Participants underwent clinical assessment prior to programme commencement, immediately following completion and 12 months following programme completion. They provided data for utility (quality-adjusted life years (QALY) determined using SF6D (utility scores for health states) calculated from 36-Item Short Form Health Survey version 2) and effectiveness (change in distance walked on 6-min walk test (Δ6MWD) following pulmonary rehabilitation ). Individual-level cost data for the 12 months following programme completion was sourced from healthcare administration and government databases. RESULTS: Between-group mean difference point estimates for cost (-$4497 (95% CI: -$12 250 to $3257), utility (0.025 (-0.038 to 0.086) QALY) and effectiveness (14 m (-11 to 39) Δ6MWD) favoured the home-based group. Cost-utility analyses demonstrated 63% of estimates falling in the dominant southeast quadrant and the probability that the new home-based model was cost-effective at a $0 threshold for willingness to pay was 78%. Results were robust to a range of sensitivity analyses. Programme completion was associated with significantly lower healthcare costs in the following 12 months. CONCLUSION: Home-based pulmonary rehabilitation provides a cost-effective alternative model for people with COPD who cannot access traditional centre-based programmes.

Factors predicting progression of exercise training loads in people with interstitial lung disease.

In ILD, adherence to the training sessions in pulmonary rehabilitation predicts progression of exercise training loads; declining lung function is an independent predictor of failure to progress training loads http://bit.ly/2Z4x9Nw.

Oxygen compared to air during exercise training in COPD with exercise-induced desaturation.

Almost half the patients referred to pulmonary rehabilitation with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) desaturate during exercise. Although oxygen supplementation may ameliorate oxygen desaturation, the effects on outcomes of exercise training have not been rigorously evaluated. This study aimed to determine whether supplemental oxygen during exercise training was more effective than medical air in improving exercise capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in people with COPD.People with COPD who demonstrated oxygen desaturation <90% during the 6-min walk test were recruited to this multicentre trial with randomisation (independent, concealed allocation) to either an Oxygen group or Air group, blinding (participants, exercise trainers and European Respiratory Journal assessors) and intention-to-treat analysis. Both groups received the respective gas from concentrators via nasal prongs at 5 L·min-1 during exercise training consisting of treadmill and cycle exercise, three times per week for 8 weeks. Primary outcomes were the endurance shuttle walk test (ESWT) time and Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ)-Total score.111 participants (60 males), mean±sd age 69±7 years, with moderate to severe COPD were recruited and 97 completed (Oxygen group n=52; Air group n=45). At the end of the 8-week training programme there were no between-group differences in change in ESWT (mean difference 15 s (95% CI -106-136 s) or change in CRQ-Total (0.0 points (95% CI -0.3-0.3 points)). Within-group changes at end-training were significant for ESWT and CRQ-Total (all p<0.01).Exercise capacity and HRQoL improved in both groups, with no greater benefit from training with supplemental oxygen than medical air.