Glittre endurance test: A new test to assess the functional capacity of individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: For people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) the ability to perform functional activities for a prolonged duration is important for completion of daily tasks. While the Glittre-ADL test measures time taken to complete a series of functional activities, there is no test of endurance capacity for common daily activities. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is the Glittre Endurance test a valid and responsive test to measure endurance capacity for functional daily tasks in people with COPD? METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. Fifty-seven participants with COPD (mean ± SD age:69 ± 7 years; FEV1:48 ± 18%predicted) were recruited. All participants performed the Glittre-ADL test without a backpack (Glittre-ADL-noBP). Nine participants (Group A) performed a Glittre Endurance test at 90% of the speed to complete one lap of the Glittre-ADL-noBP. 48 participants (Group B) performed two Glittre Endurance tests at 100% of Glittre-ADL-noBP speed. The time to voluntary cessation or not keeping up with target pace was the test outcome. RESULTS: Mean ± SD of the Glittre Endurance test was 12.11 ± 6.43 min and 6.90 ± 4.40 min for the test at 90% and 100% speeds, respectively. When the 100% Glittre Endurance test 2 was compared to test 1, there was a 14% increase in test time, indicating a learning effect (p = 0.005). Following pulmonary rehabilitation (n = 20) the Glittre Endurance test increased by 3.12 min (29%), and the Glittre-ADL-noBP reduced by 0.33 min (10%). CONCLUSION: The Glittre Endurance test performed at 100% of the Glittre-ADL-noBP speed provided an appropriate endurance test time, and was more sensitive to change following pulmonary rehabilitation than the Glittre-ADL-noBP.

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.

An observational study of self-reported sedentary behaviour in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and bronchiectasis.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined sedentary behaviour in chronic respiratory disease. The limited evidence suggests that increased levels of sedentary behaviour are associated with increased mortality. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the level of self-reported sedentary behaviour in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and bronchiectasis as well as to identify associations between sedentary time with functional performance measures and health-related quality of life in the chronic respiratory disease group. METHODS: An observational study design was used. Participants completed the Sedentary Behaviour Questionnaire from which average sedentary time (hours/day) was determined. Functional performance was measured using the six-minute walk test, the four-metre gait speed test and the five sit-to-stand test. Health-related quality of life was measured using the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire. Sedentary time was compared between groups using an unpaired t-test. Univariate analysis explored relationships amongst variables. RESULTS: The convenience sample consisted of 103 people with COPD [52% male; mean±SD age: 73±9 years, FEV1% predicted: 56±23] and 33 people with bronchiectasis [52% male; 74±8 years, FEV1% predicted: 69±25]. Average self-reported sedentary time in COPD was 7.6±2.7 hours/day and in bronchiectasis was 8.0±4.1 hours/day, with no between-group difference (-0.4, 95% CI -1.7, 0.8). No associations were found between sedentary time and any functional performance outcome or with health-related quality of life. CONCLUSION: There was no difference in the high sedentary time between people with COPD and bronchiectasis. Sedentary behaviour was not associated with functional performance or disease-related health-related quality of life in people with chronic respiratory disease.