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