Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is widely recommended for short-term benefits in chronic respiratory diseases, yet long-term outcomes remain uncertain. This retrospective cohort study addresses this gap, comparing 20-year mortality rates between PR participants and matched controls, and hypothesizing that the short-term benefits of PR contribute to improved long-term survival. Methods The 20-year mortality of stable chronic respiratory patients who participated in an outpatient PR program was compared with a matched control group based on the type of lung disease. Demographic and clinical variables, and the dates of deaths, were extracted and compared between two groups with two sample t-test and chi-square tests. Kaplan-Meier plots and Cox regression analyses were employed to evaluate survival differences. Results Between 2000 and 2002, 238 individuals enrolled in a pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) program (58% male, mean age ± SD: 69 ± 8 years, mean FEV 1 % predicted ± SD: 46 ± 21%). An equal number of people with comparable lung disease were selected as controls (88% COPD, 5% ILD). Controls had lower FEV 1 % predicted values (mean ± SD: 39 ± 17%, P  < 0.001), smoked more (mean ± SD: 48 ± 35 pack-years, P  = 0.032), and no differences in age, BMI, sex, and Index of Relative Socio-economic Advantage and Disadvantage (IRSAD). Median (IQR) follow-up time was 68 months (34–123), with 371 (78%) deaths. Univariable (HR = 1.71, p  < 0.001) and multivariable (HR = 1.64, p  < 0.001) Cox regression found higher mortality risk in controls. Subgroup analysis for COPD replicated these findings (HR = 1.70, P  < 0.001). Discussion Despite some methodological limitations, our study suggests that clinically stable patients with chronic respiratory disease who undertake PR may have lower mortality than matched controls. Trial registration Retrospectively registered.

Background Interstitial lung disease is a debilitating condition associated with significant dyspnoea, fatigue, and poor exercise tolerance. Pulmonary rehabilitation is an effective and key intervention in people with interstitial lung disease. However, despite the best efforts of patients and clinicians, many of those who participate are not achieving clinically meaningful benefits. This assessor-blinded, multi-centre, randomised controlled trial aims to compare the clinical benefits of high intensity interval exercise training versus the standard pulmonary rehabilitation method of continuous training at moderate intensity in people with fibrotic interstitial lung disease. Methods Eligible participants will be randomised to either a standard pulmonary rehabilitation group using moderate intensity continuous exercise training or high intensity interval exercise training. Participants in both groups will undertake an 8-week pulmonary rehabilitation program of twice-weekly supervised exercise training including aerobic (cycling) and strengthening exercises. In addition, participants in both groups will be prescribed a home exercise program. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline, upon completion of the intervention and at six months following the intervention by a blinded assessor. The primary outcome is endurance time on a constant work rate test. Secondary outcomes are functional capacity (6-min walk distance), health-related quality of life (Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ), St George’s Respiratory Questionnaire idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis specific version (SGRQ-I), breathlessness (Dyspnoea 12, Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale), fatigue (fatigue severity scale), anxiety (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), physical activity level (GeneActiv), skeletal muscle changes (ultrasonography) and completion and adherence to pulmonary rehabilitation. Discussion The standard exercise training strategies used in pulmonary rehabilitation may not provide an optimal exercise training stimulus for people with interstitial lung disease. This study will determine whether high intensity interval training can produce equivalent or even superior changes in exercise performance and symptoms. If high intensity interval training proves effective, it will provide an exercise training strategy that can readily be implemented into clinical practice for people with interstitial lung disease. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03800914). Registered 11 January 2019, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03800914 Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12619000019101. Registered 9 January 2019, https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=376050&isReview=true

Background Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) presents with physical, emotional and social difficulties that affect quality of life. Multimodal management includes both pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies, and pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) plays an important role. Recent research has suggested that manual therapies may improve perceptions of dyspnea for people with COPD. Methods Focus group interviews were conducted as part of a mixed methods study to assess the feasibility of implementing a manual therapy technique—muscle energy technique (MET)—as an adjunct to PR for people with moderate to severe COPD. Focus group interviews were conducted to examine trial participants views of the intervention and the trial design. A thematic analysis was undertaken to explore the data. Results Twelve participants with moderate to severe COPD participated in three focus groups. Participants were motivated to participate in the trial to be proactive about their health. They perceived MET to be a gentle, comfortable form of stretching that allowed them to ‘breathe easier’ and prepared them for PR. A small number of participants reported mild muscular discomfort during MET, but this was short-lasting and was not bothersome. Participants enjoyed the one-on-one contact with researchers and learned more about their breathing while performing spirometric testing. Most participants wanted longer and more frequent MET sessions, and some requested ‘homework’ stretching exercises. Conclusions The findings of this study show that a manual therapy intervention was received well by participants in a clinical trial setting. A small number of participants reported mild musculoskeletal discomfort in relation to the MET treatment. Participant preferences for additional and longer treatment sessions should be carefully considered against available resources in future clinical trials. Trial registration ANZCTR, ACTRN12618000801213. Registered 11 May 2018 - Retrospectively registered. http://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=374643&isReview=true

BackgroundPulmonary rehabilitation is a cornerstone of care for COPD but uptake of traditional centre-based programmes is poor. We assessed whether home-based pulmonary rehabilitation, delivered using minimal resources, had equivalent outcomes to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation.MethodsA randomised controlled equivalence trial with 12 months follow-up. Participants with stable COPD were randomly assigned to receive 8 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation by either the standard outpatient centre-based model, or a new home-based model including one home visit and seven once-weekly telephone calls from a physiotherapist. The primary outcome was change in 6 min walk distance (6MWD).ResultsWe enrolled 166 participants to receive centre-based rehabilitation (n=86) or home-based rehabilitation (n=80). Intention-to-treat analysis confirmed non-inferiority of home-based rehabilitation for 6MWD at end-rehabilitation and the confidence interval (CI) did not rule out superiority (mean difference favouring home group 18.6 m, 95% CI −3.3 to 40.7). At 12 months the CI did not exclude inferiority (−5.1 m, −29.2 to 18.9). Between-group differences for dyspnoea-related quality of life did not rule out superiority of home-based rehabilitation at programme completion (1.6 points, −0.3 to 3.5) and groups were equivalent at 12 months (0.05 points, −2.0 to 2.1). The per-protocol analysis showed the same pattern of findings. Neither group maintained postrehabilitation gains at 12 months.ConclusionsThis home-based pulmonary rehabilitation model, delivered with minimal resources, produced short-term clinical outcomes that were equivalent to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation. Neither model was effective in maintaining gains at 12 months. Home-based pulmonary rehabilitation could be considered for people with COPD who cannot access centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation.Trial registration numberNCT01423227, clinicaltrials.gov.

BackgroundUncertainty exists regarding the clinical relevance of exercise training across the range of interstitial lung diseases (ILDs).ObjectiveTo establish the impact of exercise training in patients with ILDs of differing aetiology and severity.Methods142 participants with ILD (61 idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), 22 asbestosis, 23 connective tissue disease-related ILD (CTD-ILD) and 36 with other aetiologies) were randomised to either 8 weeks of supervised exercise training or usual care. Six-minute walk distance (6MWD), Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRDQ), St George Respiratory Questionnaire IPF-specific version (SGRQ-I) and modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea score were measured at baseline, 9 weeks and 6 months.Measurements and main resultsExercise training significantly increased 6MWD (25 m, 95% CI 2 to 47 m) and health-related quality of life (CRDQ and SGRQ-I) in people with ILD. Larger improvements in 6MWD, CRDQ, SGRQ-I and dyspnoea occurred in asbestosis and IPF compared with CTD-ILD, but with few significant differences between subgroups. Benefits declined at 6 months except in CTD-ILD. Lower baseline 6MWD and worse baseline symptoms were associated with greater benefit in 6MWD and symptoms following training. Greater gains were seen in those whose exercise prescription was successfully progressed according to the protocol. At 6 months, sustained improvements in 6MWD and symptoms were associated with better baseline lung function and less pulmonary hypertension.ConclusionsExercise training is effective in patients across the range of ILDs, with clinically meaningful benefits in asbestosis and IPF. Successful exercise progression maximises improvements and sustained treatment effects favour those with milder disease.Trial registration numberResults, ACTRN12611000416998.

RationalePulmonary rehabilitation is an effective treatment for people with chronic respiratory disease but is delivered to <5% of eligible individuals. This study investigated whether home-based telerehabilitation was equivalent to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation in people with chronic respiratory disease.MethodsA multicentre randomised controlled trial with assessor blinding, powered for equivalence was undertaken. Individuals with a chronic respiratory disease referred to pulmonary rehabilitation at four participating sites (one rural) were eligible and randomised using concealed allocation to pulmonary rehabilitation or telerehabilitation. Both programmes were two times per week for 8 weeks. The primary outcome was change in Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire Dyspnoea (CRQ-D) domain at end-rehabilitation, with a prespecified equivalence margin of 2.5 points. Follow-up was at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included exercise capacity, health-related quality of life, symptoms, self-efficacy and psychological well-being.Results142 participants were randomised to pulmonary rehabilitation or telerehabilitation with 96% and 97% included in the intention-to-treat analysis, respectively. There were no significant differences between groups for any outcome at either time point. Both groups achieved meaningful improvement in dyspnoea and exercise capacity at end-rehabilitation. However, we were unable to confirm equivalence of telerehabilitation for the primary outcome ΔCRQ-D at end-rehabilitation (mean difference (MD) (95% CI) −1 point (−3 to 1)), and inferiority of telerehabilitation could not be excluded at either time point (12-month follow-up: MD −1 point (95% CI −4 to 1)). At end-rehabilitation, telerehabilitation demonstrated equivalence for 6-minute walk distance (MD −6 m, 95% CI −26 to 15) with possibly superiority of telerehabilitation at 12 months (MD 14 m, 95% CI −10 to 38).Conclusiontelerehabilitation may not be equivalent to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation for all outcomes, but is safe and achieves clinically meaningful benefits. When centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation is not available, telerehabilitation may provide an alternative programme model.Trial registration numberACtelerehabilitationN12616000360415.

Background Oxygen desaturation during exercise is common in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of the study is to determine, in people with COPD who desaturate during exercise, whether supplemental oxygen during an eight-week exercise training program is more effective than medical air (sham intervention) in improving exercise capacity and health-related quality of life both at the completion of training and at six-month follow up. Methods/Design This is a multi-centre randomised controlled trial with concealed allocation, blinding of participants, exercise trainers and assessors, and intention-to-treat analysis. 110 people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease who demonstrate oxygen desaturation lower than 90 % during the six-minute walk test will be recruited from pulmonary rehabilitation programs in seven teaching hospitals in Australia. People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on long term oxygen therapy will be excluded. After confirmation of eligibility and baseline assessment, participants will be randomised to receive either supplemental oxygen or medical air during an eight-week supervised treadmill and cycle exercise training program, three times per week for eight weeks, in hospital outpatient settings. Primary outcome measures will be endurance walking capacity assessed by the endurance shuttle walk test and health-related quality of life assessed by the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes will include peak walking capacity measured by the incremental shuttle walk test, dyspnoea via the Dyspnoea-12 questionnaire and physical activity levels measured over seven days using an activity monitor. All outcomes will be measured at baseline, completion of training and at six-month follow up. Discussion Exercise training is an essential component of pulmonary rehabilitation for people with COPD. This study will determine whether supplemental oxygen during exercise training is more effective than medical air in improving exercise capacity and health-related quality of life in people with COPD who desaturate during exercise. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12612000395831 , 5th Jan,2012

Background Exercise training is recommended for non-cystic fibrosis (CF) bronchiectasis, but the long-term effects are unclear. This randomised controlled trial aimed to determine the effects of exercise training and review of airway clearance therapy (ACT) on exercise capacity, health related quality of life (HRQOL) and the incidence of acute exacerbations in people with non-CF bronchiectasis. Methods Participants were randomly allocated to 8 weeks of supervised exercise training and review of ACT, or control. Primary outcomes of exercise capacity and HRQOL (Chronic respiratory disease questionnaire) and secondary outcomes of cough-related QOL (Leicester cough questionnaire) and psychological symptoms (Hospital anxiety and depression scale) were measured at baseline, following completion of the intervention period and at 6 and 12 months follow up. Secondary outcomes of the exacerbation rate and time to first exacerbation were analysed over 12 months. Results Eighty-five participants (mean FEV 1 74% predicted; median Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea grade of 1 (IQR [1–3]) were included. Exercise training increased the incremental shuttle walk distance (mean difference to control 62 m, 95% CI 24 to 101 m) and the 6-minute walking distance (mean difference to control 41 m, 95% CI 19 to 63 m), but these improvements were not sustained at 6 or 12 months. Exercise training reduced dyspnoea (p = 0.009) and fatigue (p = 0.01) but did not impact on cough-related QOL or mood. Exercise training reduced the frequency of acute exacerbations (median 1[IQR 1–3]) compared to the control group (2[1–3]) over 12 months follow up (p = 0.012), with a longer time to first exacerbation with exercise training of 8 months (95% CI 7 to 9 months) compared to the control group (6 months [95% CI 5 to 7 months], p = 0.047). Conclusions Exercise training in bronchiectasis is associated with short term improvement in exercise capacity, dyspnoea and fatigue and fewer exacerbations over 12 months. Trial registry ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT00885521 ).

The interstitial lung diseases (ILDs) are characterised by dyspnoea on exertion, exercise-induced hypoxaemia, reduced skeletal muscle function and exercise intolerance. Evidence from nine randomised controlled trials shows that pulmonary rehabilitation improves exercise capacity, dyspnoea and quality of life in ILD, with moderately large effect sizes from 0.59 to 0.68. Participants with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, the most common and most progressive of the ILDs, achieve benefits in exercise capacity and quality of life that are of equal magnitude to those seen in other ILDs, with effect sizes from 0.59 to 0.75. Whole body exercise training is a core component of pulmonary rehabilitation for ILD. The standard exercise prescription used for other chronic lung diseases is effective in ILD, including 8 weeks of training with at least two supervised sessions per week and at least 30 min of aerobic training per session. However, the unique presentation and underlying pathophysiology of ILD may require modifications of the exercise prescription for individual patients. Those with connective tissue disease may present with joint pain and stiffness that require modification of the standard exercise prescription, including reduction in weight-bearing exercise. Some patients with severe disease may present with distressing dyspnoea that limits the intensity or progression of training. Because exercise-induced hypoxaemia is common in ILD and more severe than seen in other chronic lung diseases, pulmonary rehabilitation should be provided in a setting where supplemental oxygen therapy is available. Pulmonary rehabilitation programs offer the opportunity to address other critical aspects of ILD care, including management of comorbidities, symptoms and mood.

This study aimed to document the perspective of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who underwent home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (HBPR) in a clinical trial. In this qualitative study, open-ended questions explored participants’ views regarding HBPR. Thirteen semi-structured interviews were analysed using a thematic analysis approach. Major themes from interviews included the positive impact of HBPR on physical fitness, breathing and mood. Participants valued the flexibility and convenience of the programme. Participants also highlighted the importance of social support received, both from the physiotherapist over the phone and from family and friends who encouraged their participation. Reported challenges were difficulties in initiating exercise, lack of variety in training and physical incapability. While most participants supported the home setting, one participant would have preferred receiving supervised exercise training at the hospital. Participants also reported that HBPR had helped establish an exercise routine and improved their disease management. This study suggests that people with COPD valued the convenience of HBPR, experienced positive impacts on physical fitness and symptoms and felt supported by their community and programme staff. This highly structured HBPR model may be acceptable to some people with COPD as an alternative to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation.