Cargando…

Comparison of laboratory- and field-based exercise tests for COPD: a systematic review

Exercise tests are often used to evaluate the functional status of patients with COPD. However, to the best of our knowledge, a comprehensive systematic comparison of these tests has not been performed. We systematically reviewed studies reporting the repeatability and/or reproducibility of these te...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fotheringham, Iain, Meakin, Georgina, Punekar, Yogesh Suresh, Riley, John H, Cockle, Sarah M, Singh, Sally J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4372024/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25834421
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S70518
_version_ 1782363117181730816
author Fotheringham, Iain
Meakin, Georgina
Punekar, Yogesh Suresh
Riley, John H
Cockle, Sarah M
Singh, Sally J
author_facet Fotheringham, Iain
Meakin, Georgina
Punekar, Yogesh Suresh
Riley, John H
Cockle, Sarah M
Singh, Sally J
author_sort Fotheringham, Iain
collection PubMed
description Exercise tests are often used to evaluate the functional status of patients with COPD. However, to the best of our knowledge, a comprehensive systematic comparison of these tests has not been performed. We systematically reviewed studies reporting the repeatability and/or reproducibility of these tests, and studies comparing their sensitivity to therapeutic intervention. A systematic review identified primary manuscripts in English reporting relevant data on the following exercise tests: 6-minute walk test (6MWT) and 12-minute walk test, incremental and endurance shuttle walk tests (ISWT and ESWT, respectively), incremental and endurance cycle ergometer tests, and incremental and endurance treadmill tests. We identified 71 relevant studies. Good repeatability (for the 6MWT and ESWT) and reproducibility (for the 6MWT, 12-minute walk test, ISWT, ESWT, and incremental cycle ergometer test) were reported by most studies assessing these tests, providing patients were familiarized with them beforehand. The 6MWT, ISWT, and particularly the ESWT were reported to be sensitive to therapeutic intervention. Protocol variations (eg, track layout or supplemental oxygen use) affected performance significantly in several studies. This review shows that while the validity of several tests has been established, for others further study is required. Future work will assess the link between these tests, physiological mechanisms, and patient-reported measures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4372024
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43720242015-04-01 Comparison of laboratory- and field-based exercise tests for COPD: a systematic review Fotheringham, Iain Meakin, Georgina Punekar, Yogesh Suresh Riley, John H Cockle, Sarah M Singh, Sally J Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis Review Exercise tests are often used to evaluate the functional status of patients with COPD. However, to the best of our knowledge, a comprehensive systematic comparison of these tests has not been performed. We systematically reviewed studies reporting the repeatability and/or reproducibility of these tests, and studies comparing their sensitivity to therapeutic intervention. A systematic review identified primary manuscripts in English reporting relevant data on the following exercise tests: 6-minute walk test (6MWT) and 12-minute walk test, incremental and endurance shuttle walk tests (ISWT and ESWT, respectively), incremental and endurance cycle ergometer tests, and incremental and endurance treadmill tests. We identified 71 relevant studies. Good repeatability (for the 6MWT and ESWT) and reproducibility (for the 6MWT, 12-minute walk test, ISWT, ESWT, and incremental cycle ergometer test) were reported by most studies assessing these tests, providing patients were familiarized with them beforehand. The 6MWT, ISWT, and particularly the ESWT were reported to be sensitive to therapeutic intervention. Protocol variations (eg, track layout or supplemental oxygen use) affected performance significantly in several studies. This review shows that while the validity of several tests has been established, for others further study is required. Future work will assess the link between these tests, physiological mechanisms, and patient-reported measures. Dove Medical Press 2015-03-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4372024/ /pubmed/25834421 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S70518 Text en © 2015 Fotheringham et al. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Review
Fotheringham, Iain
Meakin, Georgina
Punekar, Yogesh Suresh
Riley, John H
Cockle, Sarah M
Singh, Sally J
Comparison of laboratory- and field-based exercise tests for COPD: a systematic review
title Comparison of laboratory- and field-based exercise tests for COPD: a systematic review
title_full Comparison of laboratory- and field-based exercise tests for COPD: a systematic review
title_fullStr Comparison of laboratory- and field-based exercise tests for COPD: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of laboratory- and field-based exercise tests for COPD: a systematic review
title_short Comparison of laboratory- and field-based exercise tests for COPD: a systematic review
title_sort comparison of laboratory- and field-based exercise tests for copd: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4372024/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25834421
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S70518
work_keys_str_mv AT fotheringhamiain comparisonoflaboratoryandfieldbasedexercisetestsforcopdasystematicreview
AT meakingeorgina comparisonoflaboratoryandfieldbasedexercisetestsforcopdasystematicreview
AT punekaryogeshsuresh comparisonoflaboratoryandfieldbasedexercisetestsforcopdasystematicreview
AT rileyjohnh comparisonoflaboratoryandfieldbasedexercisetestsforcopdasystematicreview
AT cocklesarahm comparisonoflaboratoryandfieldbasedexercisetestsforcopdasystematicreview
AT singhsallyj comparisonoflaboratoryandfieldbasedexercisetestsforcopdasystematicreview