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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |