Dr Narelle S Cox, Dr Christine McDonald, Dr Angela T Burge, Dr Catherine J Hill, Ms Janet Bondarenko, Prof Anne E Holland
{"title":"Comparison of clinically meaningful improvements following center-based and home-based tele rehabilitation in people with COPD.","authors":"Dr Narelle S Cox, Dr Christine McDonald, Dr Angela T Burge, Dr Catherine J Hill, Ms Janet Bondarenko, Prof Anne E Holland","doi":"10.1016/j.chest.2024.11.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Response to pulmonary rehabilitation is not equal for all participants, and may vary across health outcomes for any one individual. Alternative modes of pulmonary rehabilitation delivery, e.g. telerehabilitation, may improve program access but could also affect response to rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Research questions: </strong>What is the rate of clinical response to home-based telerehabilitation compared to center-based pulmonary rehabilitation? And, are there participant baseline characteristics associated with pulmonary rehabilitation response relative to model of delivery?</p><p><strong>Study design and methods: </strong>Secondary analysis of two randomized controlled trials. Participants were categorized as 'responders' or 'non-responders' according to achievement of the minimal important difference (MID) for each outcome of interest at end rehabilitation and after 12-month follow-up (change from baseline). Outcomes of interest were: functional exercise capacity (six-minute walk distance [6MWD], MID 30m); health-related quality of life (chronic respiratory questionnaire [CRQ], MID 2.5, 2, 3.5 and 2 points for the dyspnea, fatigue, emotion and mastery domains, respectively; CRQ total score MID 10 points); and symptoms (modified Medical Research Council [mMRC], MID -1 point).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>266 individuals with COPD were included in the analysis. The proportion of responders was not different between center-based pulmonary rehabilitation and home-based telerehabilitation at either end rehabilitation or 12-month follow-up for any outcome (range 39% to 62%). In a binary logistic regression analysis, baseline outcome values, but not participant demographic characteristics, were most commonly associated with responder status. The relative risk of program non-completion in the center-based group was nearly four times greater than for telerehabilitation (PR completion: center-based PR n=79 (58%) versus home-based telerehabilitation n=116 (90%); RR 3.89, 95%CI 2.28 to 6.63).</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>Responder status to pulmonary rehabilitation was not different between center-based and home-based telerehabilitation. The ability to identify patient characteristics that confer greater potential for rehabilitation response, or better suitability for a particular model of rehabilitation, remains a challenge. Take home points: STUDY QUESTION: What is the rate of clinical response to home-based telerehabilitation compared to center-based pulmonary rehabilitation? And, are participant baseline characteristics, program completion or program location associated with rehabilitation response?</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The proportion of responders to rehabilitation is not different between center-based and home-based telerehabilitation programs; however the risk of program non-completion is 4 times higher for center-based rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Interpretations: </strong>Responder status to pulmonary rehabilitation was not different between center-based and home-based telerehabilitation, although rehabilitation completion was higher for home-based telerehabilitation. Identifying participant features that confer greater potential for rehabilitation response, or better suitability for a particular model of rehabilitation, remains a challenge.</p>","PeriodicalId":9782,"journal":{"name":"Chest","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chest","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2024.11.001","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Response to pulmonary rehabilitation is not equal for all participants, and may vary across health outcomes for any one individual. Alternative modes of pulmonary rehabilitation delivery, e.g. telerehabilitation, may improve program access but could also affect response to rehabilitation.
Research questions: What is the rate of clinical response to home-based telerehabilitation compared to center-based pulmonary rehabilitation? And, are there participant baseline characteristics associated with pulmonary rehabilitation response relative to model of delivery?
Study design and methods: Secondary analysis of two randomized controlled trials. Participants were categorized as 'responders' or 'non-responders' according to achievement of the minimal important difference (MID) for each outcome of interest at end rehabilitation and after 12-month follow-up (change from baseline). Outcomes of interest were: functional exercise capacity (six-minute walk distance [6MWD], MID 30m); health-related quality of life (chronic respiratory questionnaire [CRQ], MID 2.5, 2, 3.5 and 2 points for the dyspnea, fatigue, emotion and mastery domains, respectively; CRQ total score MID 10 points); and symptoms (modified Medical Research Council [mMRC], MID -1 point).
Results: 266 individuals with COPD were included in the analysis. The proportion of responders was not different between center-based pulmonary rehabilitation and home-based telerehabilitation at either end rehabilitation or 12-month follow-up for any outcome (range 39% to 62%). In a binary logistic regression analysis, baseline outcome values, but not participant demographic characteristics, were most commonly associated with responder status. The relative risk of program non-completion in the center-based group was nearly four times greater than for telerehabilitation (PR completion: center-based PR n=79 (58%) versus home-based telerehabilitation n=116 (90%); RR 3.89, 95%CI 2.28 to 6.63).
Interpretation: Responder status to pulmonary rehabilitation was not different between center-based and home-based telerehabilitation. The ability to identify patient characteristics that confer greater potential for rehabilitation response, or better suitability for a particular model of rehabilitation, remains a challenge. Take home points: STUDY QUESTION: What is the rate of clinical response to home-based telerehabilitation compared to center-based pulmonary rehabilitation? And, are participant baseline characteristics, program completion or program location associated with rehabilitation response?
Results: The proportion of responders to rehabilitation is not different between center-based and home-based telerehabilitation programs; however the risk of program non-completion is 4 times higher for center-based rehabilitation.
Interpretations: Responder status to pulmonary rehabilitation was not different between center-based and home-based telerehabilitation, although rehabilitation completion was higher for home-based telerehabilitation. Identifying participant features that confer greater potential for rehabilitation response, or better suitability for a particular model of rehabilitation, remains a challenge.
期刊介绍：
At CHEST, our mission is to revolutionize patient care through the collaboration of multidisciplinary clinicians in the fields of pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine. We achieve this by publishing cutting-edge clinical research that addresses current challenges and brings forth future advancements. To enhance understanding in a rapidly evolving field, CHEST also features review articles, commentaries, and facilitates discussions on emerging controversies. We place great emphasis on scientific rigor, employing a rigorous peer review process, and ensuring all accepted content is published online within two weeks.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
