Telerehabilitation Programme as a Maintenance Strategy for COPD Patients: A 12-Month Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: There is uncertainty regarding efficacy of telehealth-based approaches in COPD patients for sustaining benefits achieved with intensive pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). RESEARCH QUESTION: To determine whether a maintenance pulmonary telerehabilitation (TelePR) programme, after intensive initial PR, is superior to usual care in sustaining over time benefits achieved by intensive PR. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A multicentre open-label pragmatic parallel-group randomized clinical trial was conducted. Two groups were created at completion of an 8-week intensive outpatient hospital PR programme. Intervention group (IG) patients were given appropriate training equipment and instructed to perform three weekly training sessions and send performance data through an app to a web-based platform. Patients in the control group (CG) were advised to exercise regularly (usual care). RESULTS: Ninety-four patients (46 IG, 48 CG) were randomized. The analysis of covariance showed non-significant improvements in 6-min walk distance [19.9m (95% CI -4.1/+43.8)] and Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire - Emotion score [0.4 points (0-0.8)] in the IG. Secondary linear mixed models showed improvements in the IG in Short Form-36 mental component summary [9.7, (4.0-15.4)] and Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire - Emotion [0.5, (0.2-0.9)] scores, but there was no association between compliance and outcomes. Acute exacerbations were associated with a marginally significant decrease in 6-minute walk distance of 15.8m (-32.3/0.8) in linear models. CONCLUSIONS: The TelePR maintenance strategy was both feasible and safe but failed to show superiority over usual care, despite improvements in some HRQoL domains. Acute exacerbations may have an important negative influence on long-term physical function. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03247933.

[Review of the utilization of the RAND appropriateness method in the biomedical literature (1999-2004)]. / Evaluación del uso apropiado de procedimientos sanitarios mediante el método RAND: revisión de su aplicación en la literatura biomédica (1999-2004).

OBJECTIVES: To identify and describe studies using the RAND/UCLA method to evaluate the appropriateness of health procedures. This method is a consensus technique that involves several phases to develop appropriateness criteria. METHODS: We performed a literature search in 2005. OVIDMedline, ISI Web of Knowledge, IME and Highwire were consulted. Articles published between 1999 and 2004 and using the key words "appropriateness", "utilization review" and "physician practice patterns" were selected. Studies using the RAND method were included and those that did not explain the methodology in sufficient detail were excluded. Information on the procedure studied, the place and year of publication, and the characteristics of the journal were extracted from each article. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: A total of 5092 articles were identified and 205 were selected. Slightly more than half analyzed surgical or medical procedures, while 16.5% evaluated healthcare quality. More than 50% were published in journals of public health, general medicine, and gastroenterology and hepatology. The mean impact factor was 4.07. A quarter (25.4%) of the articles was published in 1999. CONCLUSIONS AND PERSPECTIVE: The RAND method is still widely used. Appropriateness criteria can be used to review utilization of procedures, to design guidelines, or to support for decision making. These tools should be reviewed to obtain evermore valid and reliable results.