Search

Purpose: We aimed to elicit patients' views of research priorities related to pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). Method:We used a modified nominal group technique in which participants with chronic lung conditions who had completed PR attended one of five meetings during which they generated ideas, discussed them with the group, and prioritized their top three topics. Afterward, they completed member checking and satisfaction questionnaires. Results:Fourteen participants (mean age 71 years) prioritized 25 topics, which included music as a motivator, education about the reason for various assessments and exercises, and ongoing patient assessment and follow-up. Most participants "totally agreed" that the summarized topics matched what they thought was important in PR research (75%) and that the meeting was a positive experience (100%). Participants indicated that the findings of this study accurately reflected their priorities. Conclusions:Individuals who have completed PR may have questions about programme components including assessment, treatment, and strategies for promoting motivation. To inform future research projects and identify knowledge translation needs, we will distribute a questionnaire to a larger sample of former PR patients to further prioritize the 25 topics identified in the meetings. Objectif : connaître les points de vue des patients sur les priorités de la recherche en réadaptation pulmonaire (RP). Méthodologie : les chercheurs ont utilisé une technique de groupe nominale modifiée selon laquelle les participants atteints d'une pneumopathie chronique qui ont effectué une RP ont assisté à l'une des cinq rencontres pour générer des idées, en parler en groupe et prioriser leurs trois thèmes principaux. Ils ont ensuite rempli les questionnaires de vérification et de satisfaction des membres. Résultats : quatorze participants (d'un âge moyen de 71 ans) ont priorisé 25 thèmes, qui incluaient la musique comme élément motivateur, l'éducation sur la raison des diverses évaluations et des divers exercices ainsi que l'évaluation et le suivi continus des patients. La plupart des participants étaient « totalement d'accord » avec le fait que les thèmes résumés correspondaient à ce qu'ils considéraient comme important en recherche sur la RP (75 %) et que la rencontre était une expérience positive (100 %). Les participants ont indiqué que les résultats de cette étude étaient un reflet exact de leurs priorités. Conclusions : les personnes qui ont effectué la RP peuvent avoir des questions sur les éléments du programme, y compris l'évaluation, le traitement et les stratégies pour promouvoir la motivation. Afin d'éclairer les projets de recherche et de déterminer les besoins en application des connaissances, les chercheurs distribueront un questionnaire à un plus grand échantillon d'anciens patients en RP afin de mieux prioriser les 25 thèmes établis pendant les rencontres. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Rationale: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is the most effective strategy to improve health outcomes in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), although it has had limited success in promoting sustained physical activity. PR with a strong focus on disease self-management may better facilitate long-term behavior change. Objectives: To compare a newly developed enhanced PR (EPR) program with a traditional PR program on outcome achievement. Methods: In this randomized parallel-group controlled trial, PR classes were block-randomized to EPR or traditional PR and were delivered over 16 sessions each. The EPR program incorporated new and updated "Living Well with COPD" education modules, which had a stronger focus on chronic disease self-management. Fidelity of the intervention for content and delivery was assessed. Physical activity, self-efficacy, exercise tolerance, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were collected before, after, and 6 months after PR. Healthcare visits were collected 2 years before PR and 1 year after. Mortality was recorded 1 year after PR. Results: Of the 207 patients with COPD enrolled, 108 received EPR and 99 received traditional PR. Physical activity (steps) and self-efficacy improved from before to after PR in both programs, with no differences between groups. These effects were not sustained at 6 months. Exercise tolerance and HRQoL improved from before to after PR with no between-group differences and were maintained at 6 months. Visits to primary care providers and respiratory specialists decreased in the EPR program relative to the traditional PR program. EPR was delivered as intended, and there was no meaningful cross-contamination between the two programs. Conclusions: Enhancing PR to have a greater emphasis on chronic disease self-management did not result in a superior improvement of physical activity and health outcomes compared with traditional PR except for reduced resource usage from primary and specialist physician visits in the EPR program.Clinical trial registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02917915). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) improves functional exercise capacity and health status in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), although these outcomes are often not maintained following PR. Self-efficacy is a precursor to outcomes achievement, yet few studies have examined the importance of self-efficacy to outcome improvement during PR, or how it develops over time. Further, the contribution of exercise-specific self-efficacy to outcomes in PR is unknown. The aims of this study were to determine (a) whether baseline exercise self-efficacy predicts PR attendance and change in functional exercise capacity and health status over PR, and (b) if exercise self-efficacy changes with PR. Method: Fifty-eight out of 64 patients with COPD completed PR and assessments of exercise self-efficacy (task, coping, scheduling), the 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) at the beginning and end of PR. Analyses were conducted to predict attendance, and change in 6MWT and SGRQ, while controlling for baseline demographic and clinical indicators. Change in 6MWT, SGRQ, and self-efficacy with PR was also examined. Results: Clinically significant increases in the 6MWT and SGRQ were achieved with PR. Stronger task self-efficacy predicted better attendance, while stronger coping self-efficacy predicted greater 6MWT improvement. No variables predicted SGRQ change. Scheduling self-efficacy significantly improved with PR, whereas task and coping self-efficacy did not. Conclusion: Baseline exercise self-efficacy appears to be a determinant of rehabilitation attendance and functional exercise improvement with PR. Clinicians should evaluate and target exercise self-efficacy to maximize adherence and health outcome improvement with PR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Techniques to increase physical activity among pulmonary rehabilitation patients outside of the rehabilitation context are warranted. Implementation intentions are a strategy used to initiate goal-directed behaviour, and have been found to be useful in other populations. This study compared the long-term effects of exercise and social implementation intentions interventions on objectively measured physical activity in 40 pulmonary rehabilitation patients randomly assigned to condition. Repeated measures ANOVAs found that those in the exercise implementation intentions group took more steps ( p = .007) at the end of pulmonary rehabilitation than those in the social implementation intentions group. Improvements attained by the exercise group during the intervention were not maintained 6-months following rehabilitation. Implementation intentions targeting physical activity appear to have positive short term effects on physical activity, although the long term effects are less consistent. This may be due in part to methods used to assess physical activity behaviour. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although participation in pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) improves the health outcomes in patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), there are insufficient resources to provide PR to all patients with COPD. Thus, predicting which patients are at risk for drop-out and non-response to rehabilitation is necessary in order to optimize limited resources. This study examined which patient characteristics are predictive of PR drop-out and non-response. 814 patients with COPD took part in standard out-patient PR for 8 weeks. Demographic and standard clinical data were collected before the rehabilitation program had started. Data was analyzed retrospectively to determine if baseline patient characteristics could predict drop-out and non-response to rehabilitation. Drop-out was defined as participation in less than 50% of the rehabilitation sessions. Non-response was defined as improvement less than 4% on the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ). A discriminant function analysis identified age, smoking history, and health status as predictors of patient drop-out, p < .0001, with younger, current smokers and patients with lower health status being at risk for drop-out. No variables measured significantly predicted who those at risk would be for non-response to rehabilitation, p > .05. Pulmonary function data did not predict drop-out or non-response to PR. These findings indicate that perceived impairment (i.e., health status) is more likely to influence completion of rehabilitation than actual pulmonary impairment and that demographic and standard clinical data do not adequately predict patient drop-out and non-response to rehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Objective: This study examined if ongoing support delivered by telephone following pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) assisted chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients to maintain health outcomes. Methods: Phase one (n =79) compared post-rehabilitation telephone-based support delivered by peers compared to usual care (UC). The second phase (n =168) compared post-rehabilitation support from peer educators, respiratory therapists (RT), or UC. Primary outcome variables were St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score and the six minute walk test (6MWT). Measures were obtained at baseline, immediately following PR, and six-months post PR. Results: Six-month follow-up data for phase one was collected for 66 COPD patients (n =35 peer support, n =31 UC) and 142 for phase two (n =42 peer support, n =52 RT support, n =48 UC). Per-protocol and intention to treat (ITT) analysis in both phases found no significant group by time differences for SGRQ or 6MWT. Conclusion: Providing peer or RT support via telephone following PR was not more effective than UC for maintaining health outcomes. Practice implications: There are concerns with using peers to provide ongoing support to COPD patients. Additionally, COPD patients require a higher level of care than telephone support can provide. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]