Cargando…

Is the 1-minute sit-to-stand test a good tool for the evaluation of the impact of pulmonary rehabilitation? Determination of the minimal important difference in COPD

BACKGROUND: The 1-minute sit-to-stand (STS) test could be valuable to assess the level of exercise tolerance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There is a need to provide the minimal important difference (MID) of this test in pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). METHODS: COPD patients underg...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vaidya, Trija, de Bisschop, Claire, Beaumont, Marc, Ouksel, Hakima, Jean, Véronique, Dessables, François, Chambellan, Arnaud
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5079690/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27799759
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S115439
_version_ 1782462584556879872
author Vaidya, Trija
de Bisschop, Claire
Beaumont, Marc
Ouksel, Hakima
Jean, Véronique
Dessables, François
Chambellan, Arnaud
author_facet Vaidya, Trija
de Bisschop, Claire
Beaumont, Marc
Ouksel, Hakima
Jean, Véronique
Dessables, François
Chambellan, Arnaud
author_sort Vaidya, Trija
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The 1-minute sit-to-stand (STS) test could be valuable to assess the level of exercise tolerance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There is a need to provide the minimal important difference (MID) of this test in pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). METHODS: COPD patients undergoing the 1-minute STS test before PR were included. The test was performed at baseline and the end of PR, as well as the 6-minute walk test, and the quadriceps maximum voluntary contraction (QMVC). Home and community-based programs were conducted as recommended. Responsiveness to PR was determined by the difference in the 1-minute STS test between baseline and the end of PR. The MID was evaluated using distribution and anchor-based methods. RESULTS: Forty-eight COPD patients were included. At baseline, the significant predictors of the number of 1-minute STS repetitions were the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) (r=0.574; P<10(−3)), age (r=−0.453; P=0.001), being on long-term oxygen treatment (r=−0.454; P=0.017), and the QMVC (r=0.424; P=0.031). The multivariate analysis explained 75.8% of the variance of 1-minute STS repetitions. The improvement of the 1-minute STS repetitions at the end of PR was 3.8±4.2 (P<10(−3)). It was mainly correlated with the change in QMVC (r=0.572; P=0.004) and 6MWD (r=0.428; P=0.006). Using the distribution-based analysis, an MID of 1.9 (standard error of measurement method) or 3.1 (standard deviation method) was found. With the 6MWD as anchor, the receiver operating characteristic curve identified the MID for the change in 1-minute STS repetitions at 2.5 (sensibility: 80%, specificity: 60%) with area under curve of 0.716. CONCLUSION: The 1-minute STS test is simple and sensitive to measure the efficiency of PR. An improvement of at least three repetitions is consistent with physical benefits after PR.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5079690
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50796902016-10-31 Is the 1-minute sit-to-stand test a good tool for the evaluation of the impact of pulmonary rehabilitation? Determination of the minimal important difference in COPD Vaidya, Trija de Bisschop, Claire Beaumont, Marc Ouksel, Hakima Jean, Véronique Dessables, François Chambellan, Arnaud Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis Original Research BACKGROUND: The 1-minute sit-to-stand (STS) test could be valuable to assess the level of exercise tolerance in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There is a need to provide the minimal important difference (MID) of this test in pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). METHODS: COPD patients undergoing the 1-minute STS test before PR were included. The test was performed at baseline and the end of PR, as well as the 6-minute walk test, and the quadriceps maximum voluntary contraction (QMVC). Home and community-based programs were conducted as recommended. Responsiveness to PR was determined by the difference in the 1-minute STS test between baseline and the end of PR. The MID was evaluated using distribution and anchor-based methods. RESULTS: Forty-eight COPD patients were included. At baseline, the significant predictors of the number of 1-minute STS repetitions were the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) (r=0.574; P<10(−3)), age (r=−0.453; P=0.001), being on long-term oxygen treatment (r=−0.454; P=0.017), and the QMVC (r=0.424; P=0.031). The multivariate analysis explained 75.8% of the variance of 1-minute STS repetitions. The improvement of the 1-minute STS repetitions at the end of PR was 3.8±4.2 (P<10(−3)). It was mainly correlated with the change in QMVC (r=0.572; P=0.004) and 6MWD (r=0.428; P=0.006). Using the distribution-based analysis, an MID of 1.9 (standard error of measurement method) or 3.1 (standard deviation method) was found. With the 6MWD as anchor, the receiver operating characteristic curve identified the MID for the change in 1-minute STS repetitions at 2.5 (sensibility: 80%, specificity: 60%) with area under curve of 0.716. CONCLUSION: The 1-minute STS test is simple and sensitive to measure the efficiency of PR. An improvement of at least three repetitions is consistent with physical benefits after PR. Dove Medical Press 2016-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5079690/ /pubmed/27799759 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S115439 Text en © 2016 Vaidya et al. This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.
spellingShingle Original Research
Vaidya, Trija
de Bisschop, Claire
Beaumont, Marc
Ouksel, Hakima
Jean, Véronique
Dessables, François
Chambellan, Arnaud
Is the 1-minute sit-to-stand test a good tool for the evaluation of the impact of pulmonary rehabilitation? Determination of the minimal important difference in COPD
title Is the 1-minute sit-to-stand test a good tool for the evaluation of the impact of pulmonary rehabilitation? Determination of the minimal important difference in COPD
title_full Is the 1-minute sit-to-stand test a good tool for the evaluation of the impact of pulmonary rehabilitation? Determination of the minimal important difference in COPD
title_fullStr Is the 1-minute sit-to-stand test a good tool for the evaluation of the impact of pulmonary rehabilitation? Determination of the minimal important difference in COPD
title_full_unstemmed Is the 1-minute sit-to-stand test a good tool for the evaluation of the impact of pulmonary rehabilitation? Determination of the minimal important difference in COPD
title_short Is the 1-minute sit-to-stand test a good tool for the evaluation of the impact of pulmonary rehabilitation? Determination of the minimal important difference in COPD
title_sort is the 1-minute sit-to-stand test a good tool for the evaluation of the impact of pulmonary rehabilitation? determination of the minimal important difference in copd
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5079690/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27799759
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S115439
work_keys_str_mv AT vaidyatrija isthe1minutesittostandtestagoodtoolfortheevaluationoftheimpactofpulmonaryrehabilitationdeterminationoftheminimalimportantdifferenceincopd
AT debisschopclaire isthe1minutesittostandtestagoodtoolfortheevaluationoftheimpactofpulmonaryrehabilitationdeterminationoftheminimalimportantdifferenceincopd
AT beaumontmarc isthe1minutesittostandtestagoodtoolfortheevaluationoftheimpactofpulmonaryrehabilitationdeterminationoftheminimalimportantdifferenceincopd
AT oukselhakima isthe1minutesittostandtestagoodtoolfortheevaluationoftheimpactofpulmonaryrehabilitationdeterminationoftheminimalimportantdifferenceincopd
AT jeanveronique isthe1minutesittostandtestagoodtoolfortheevaluationoftheimpactofpulmonaryrehabilitationdeterminationoftheminimalimportantdifferenceincopd
AT dessablesfrancois isthe1minutesittostandtestagoodtoolfortheevaluationoftheimpactofpulmonaryrehabilitationdeterminationoftheminimalimportantdifferenceincopd
AT chambellanarnaud isthe1minutesittostandtestagoodtoolfortheevaluationoftheimpactofpulmonaryrehabilitationdeterminationoftheminimalimportantdifferenceincopd