Cargando…

The effect of lung-conduction exercise in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter pilot trial

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a management modality that improves the quality of life of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, PR is not readily accessible. Therefore, we developed lung-conduction exercises (LCE) that can be performed easily without any...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Su Won, Park, Jae Jun, Lyu, Yee Ran, Lee, Eun Jung, Kim, Si Yeon, Kang, Weechang, Son, Ji Woong, Jung, In Chul, Park, Yang Chun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8772685/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35060543
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000028629
_version_ 1784635900391587840
author Lee, Su Won
Park, Jae Jun
Lyu, Yee Ran
Lee, Eun Jung
Kim, Si Yeon
Kang, Weechang
Son, Ji Woong
Jung, In Chul
Park, Yang Chun
author_facet Lee, Su Won
Park, Jae Jun
Lyu, Yee Ran
Lee, Eun Jung
Kim, Si Yeon
Kang, Weechang
Son, Ji Woong
Jung, In Chul
Park, Yang Chun
author_sort Lee, Su Won
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a management modality that improves the quality of life of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, PR is not readily accessible. Therefore, we developed lung-conduction exercises (LCE) that can be performed easily without any limitations. The purpose of this randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter pilot trial was to compare the effects of LCE with PR and standard care (SC) in COPD patients. METHODS: Twenty-five participants who met the eligibility criteria were randomly allocated to the SC group (only medication, n = 9), LCE group (medication + LCE, 5 times a week, n = 8), or PR group (medication + PR, 5 times a week, n = 8). The 6-minute walk distance (6WMD), pulmonary function test, modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale, COPD assessment test (CAT), and St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) survey were carried out before starting the trial and after 4 and 8 weeks to determine motor performance, lung function, and dyspnea. RESULTS: After 8 weeks, the pulmonary function test scores were the same. The 6MWD (PR, 28.3 ± 38.5; LCE, 14.5 ± 53.1; SC, 11.5 ± 20.5; P = .984), modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (PR, 0.8 ± 1.0; LCE, 0.8 ± 0.8; SC, 0.3 ± 0.5; P = .772), CAT (PR, 7.3 ± 6.2; LCE, 4.2 ± 5.2; SC, 1.0 ± 2.2; P = .232), and SGRQ scores (PR, 11.5 ± 15.4; LCE, 5.5 ± 13.1; SC, 4.8 ± 5.1; P = .358 [PR vs LCE], P = .795 [PR vs SC]) had improved in order of PR, LCE, and SC group. Although there were no statistically significant differences in the outcome measures between the groups, there were clinically significant improvements in the CAT and SGRQ scores. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, PR showed more improvement in symptoms and quality of life than SC alone. To seek a more precise use of LCE, further full-sized studies with a long duration and additional outcome measures such as psychological assessment tools and cost-effectiveness ratio should be conducted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: KCT0004724.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8772685
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87726852022-01-21 The effect of lung-conduction exercise in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter pilot trial Lee, Su Won Park, Jae Jun Lyu, Yee Ran Lee, Eun Jung Kim, Si Yeon Kang, Weechang Son, Ji Woong Jung, In Chul Park, Yang Chun Medicine (Baltimore) 6700 BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is a management modality that improves the quality of life of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD); however, PR is not readily accessible. Therefore, we developed lung-conduction exercises (LCE) that can be performed easily without any limitations. The purpose of this randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter pilot trial was to compare the effects of LCE with PR and standard care (SC) in COPD patients. METHODS: Twenty-five participants who met the eligibility criteria were randomly allocated to the SC group (only medication, n = 9), LCE group (medication + LCE, 5 times a week, n = 8), or PR group (medication + PR, 5 times a week, n = 8). The 6-minute walk distance (6WMD), pulmonary function test, modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale, COPD assessment test (CAT), and St. George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) survey were carried out before starting the trial and after 4 and 8 weeks to determine motor performance, lung function, and dyspnea. RESULTS: After 8 weeks, the pulmonary function test scores were the same. The 6MWD (PR, 28.3 ± 38.5; LCE, 14.5 ± 53.1; SC, 11.5 ± 20.5; P = .984), modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (PR, 0.8 ± 1.0; LCE, 0.8 ± 0.8; SC, 0.3 ± 0.5; P = .772), CAT (PR, 7.3 ± 6.2; LCE, 4.2 ± 5.2; SC, 1.0 ± 2.2; P = .232), and SGRQ scores (PR, 11.5 ± 15.4; LCE, 5.5 ± 13.1; SC, 4.8 ± 5.1; P = .358 [PR vs LCE], P = .795 [PR vs SC]) had improved in order of PR, LCE, and SC group. Although there were no statistically significant differences in the outcome measures between the groups, there were clinically significant improvements in the CAT and SGRQ scores. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, PR showed more improvement in symptoms and quality of life than SC alone. To seek a more precise use of LCE, further full-sized studies with a long duration and additional outcome measures such as psychological assessment tools and cost-effectiveness ratio should be conducted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: KCT0004724. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022-01-21 /pmc/articles/PMC8772685/ /pubmed/35060543 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000028629 Text en Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
spellingShingle 6700
Lee, Su Won
Park, Jae Jun
Lyu, Yee Ran
Lee, Eun Jung
Kim, Si Yeon
Kang, Weechang
Son, Ji Woong
Jung, In Chul
Park, Yang Chun
The effect of lung-conduction exercise in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter pilot trial
title The effect of lung-conduction exercise in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter pilot trial
title_full The effect of lung-conduction exercise in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter pilot trial
title_fullStr The effect of lung-conduction exercise in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter pilot trial
title_full_unstemmed The effect of lung-conduction exercise in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter pilot trial
title_short The effect of lung-conduction exercise in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter pilot trial
title_sort effect of lung-conduction exercise in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: randomized, assessor-blind, multicenter pilot trial
topic 6700
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8772685/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35060543
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000028629
work_keys_str_mv AT leesuwon theeffectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT parkjaejun theeffectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT lyuyeeran theeffectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT leeeunjung theeffectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT kimsiyeon theeffectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT kangweechang theeffectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT sonjiwoong theeffectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT junginchul theeffectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT parkyangchun theeffectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT leesuwon effectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT parkjaejun effectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT lyuyeeran effectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT leeeunjung effectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT kimsiyeon effectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT kangweechang effectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT sonjiwoong effectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT junginchul effectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial
AT parkyangchun effectoflungconductionexerciseinchronicobstructivepulmonarydiseaserandomizedassessorblindmulticenterpilottrial