Cargando…
Real-life feasibility and effectiveness of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease requiring medical equipment
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a key treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but studies are still needed to identify the most pertinent criteria to personalize this intervention and improve its efficacy. OBJECTIVE: This real-life retrospective study compared the effe...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5732556/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29263659 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/COPD.S150827 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a key treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but studies are still needed to identify the most pertinent criteria to personalize this intervention and improve its efficacy. OBJECTIVE: This real-life retrospective study compared the effects of home-based PR on exercise tolerance, anxiety, depression, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in COPD patients, according to their medical equipment. METHODS: Exercise tolerance, anxiety, depression, and HRQoL were evaluated in 109 patients equipped with long-term oxygen therapy (LTOT), 84 patients with noninvasive ventilation (NIV), 25 patients with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), and 80 patients with no equipment (NE), before, just after, and 6 and 12 months after PR. RESULTS: At baseline, the body mass index in the CPAP and NIV groups was higher (p<0.05) than in the other two groups, and the forced expiratory volume in 1 second was lower in the LTOT and NIV groups (p<0.001). All parameters improved after PR in the four groups (p<0.05), but for exercise tolerance, only the 6-minute stepper test showed maintained improvement after 6 and 12 months, whereas the 10 times sit-to-stand and timed up-and-go tests were only improved just after PR. At every time point, exercise tolerance was lower in the LTOT group (p<0.05), with a similar trend in the NIV group. CONCLUSION: Despite differences in the medical equipment to treat COPD, home-based PR showed comparable feasibility, safety, and efficacy in all equipment-based groups. Medical equipment should therefore not be a barrier to home-based PR. |
---|