Does Telerehabilitation for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients Discharged with Oxygen Shorten the Time of Weaning from Oxygen?

0 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Sami Deniz, Celalettin Yılmaz, Onur Süneçli, Elmas Kuru Akyol
{"title":"Does Telerehabilitation for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients Discharged with Oxygen Shorten the Time of Weaning from Oxygen?","authors":"Sami Deniz, Celalettin Yılmaz, Onur Süneçli, Elmas Kuru Akyol","doi":"10.5152/ThoracResPract.2023.23036","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Early pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) and acute and post-acute mobilization with telemonitoring and telerehabilitation (TR) have been recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. We aimed to compare the duration of weaning from oxygen in patients with hypoxemic COVID-19 who received PR and those who did not.</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>This study was designed as a quasi-experimental study and was conducted on patients discharged with oxygen supplementation between December 2021 and May 2022. They were compared with patients who received PR and those who did not in terms of the duration of oxygen use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 61 patients (9 women in each group) completed the study. The mean age was 65 ± 12. Thirty patients underwent PR (group 1) and the remaining 31 patients were classified as control group (group 2). When the groups were compared in terms of duration of oxygen use, patients who performed PR were statistically significant shorter duration than those who did not (P = .012). In addition, PR improved their quality of life compared to group 2.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>It was concluded that although PR has many indications, it is also effective, feasible, and safe in prolonged infections and it was thought that TR may also be effective as supervised PR.</p>","PeriodicalId":75221,"journal":{"name":"Thoracic research and practice","volume":"24 6","pages":"298-303"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10724835/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thoracic research and practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/ThoracResPract.2023.23036","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Early pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) and acute and post-acute mobilization with telemonitoring and telerehabilitation (TR) have been recommended for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. We aimed to compare the duration of weaning from oxygen in patients with hypoxemic COVID-19 who received PR and those who did not.

Material and methods: This study was designed as a quasi-experimental study and was conducted on patients discharged with oxygen supplementation between December 2021 and May 2022. They were compared with patients who received PR and those who did not in terms of the duration of oxygen use.

Results: A total of 61 patients (9 women in each group) completed the study. The mean age was 65 ± 12. Thirty patients underwent PR (group 1) and the remaining 31 patients were classified as control group (group 2). When the groups were compared in terms of duration of oxygen use, patients who performed PR were statistically significant shorter duration than those who did not (P = .012). In addition, PR improved their quality of life compared to group 2.

Conclusion: It was concluded that although PR has many indications, it is also effective, feasible, and safe in prolonged infections and it was thought that TR may also be effective as supervised PR.

2019冠状病毒病患者的远程康复是否会缩短缺氧时间?
目的:建议2019冠状病毒病(新冠肺炎)患者进行早期肺部康复(PR)和急性及急性后动员,并进行远程监测和远程康复(TR)。我们旨在比较接受PR和未接受PR的低氧血症新冠肺炎患者的缺氧时间。材料和方法:本研究设计为准实验研究,对2021年12月至2022年5月期间通过补充氧气出院的患者进行。他们与接受PR和未接受PR的患者在氧气使用持续时间方面进行了比较。结果:共有61名患者(每组9名女性)完成了研究。平均年龄65±12岁。30名患者接受了PR(第1组),其余31名患者被归类为对照组(第2组)。当两组在氧气使用持续时间方面进行比较时,进行PR的患者的持续时间比没有进行PR的人短,具有统计学意义(P=.012)。此外,与第2组相比,PR提高了他们的生活质量。结论:尽管PR有许多指征,但它也是有效、可行的,并且在长期感染中是安全的,并且认为TR作为监督PR也可能是有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信