Pulmonary rehabilitation under supervision of health-professional at institute versus conventional exercise-based pulmonary rehabilitation at home in COPD patients: A longitudinal cohort study

Objectives

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pulmonary rehabilitation under the supervision of health professionals at the institute versus conventional exercise-based pulmonary rehabilitation at home in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) patients.

Methods

Patients of COPD received pulmonary rehabilitation under the supervision of a professional at the institute (PI cohort, n = 115) or self-driven traditional Chinese methods-based pulmonary rehabilitation at home (CE cohort, n = 127) or did not receive any type of pulmonary rehabilitation (ME cohort, n = 155). All patients received inhaled pharmacological treatment for COPD.

Results

Before commencing inhaled pharmacological treatment with or without pulmonary rehabilitation (BT) COPD patients had 5 (5–4) / patient BODE (body-mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnea, and exercise capacity) index score and 12 (13–12) / patient exacerbations (in 6-months) reported. After 6 months of inhaled pharmacological treatment for COPD with or without pulmonary rehabilitation (AT), a six-minute walking test was improved and the BODE index score and exacerbations during 6 months were decreased for patients of the PI cohort as compared to BT conditions and compared to those of the CE and ME cohorts in AT conditions (p < 0.05 for all). Patients of PI, CE, and ME cohorts had the risk of under treatment for <0.01 BODE index score, <1.32 BODE index score, and <3.14 BODE index score, respectively.

Conclusions

Chinese patients with COPD have worse clinical conditions. After 6 months of inhaled pharmacological treatment for COPD with pulmonary rehabilitations at institutes improves the conditions of COPD patients.