Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Eur J Phys Rehabil Med ; 59(1): 103-110, 2023 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36700245

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Between 30% and 60% of people who have been infected with COVID-19 still had symptoms 3 months after the start of the disease. Prescribing a pulmonary rehabilitation program in rehabilitation facilities for post COVID-19 patients could help alleviate the symptoms. However, rehabilitation facilities known to provide good quality care to COVID-19 patients and all other patients, could become saturated by the rise in cases. Home-based rehabilitation is a potential solution that could be sustainable in the long term to avoid this saturation and/or a very long waiting list for patients. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate whether home-based rehabilitation would have similar effects compared to inpatient rehabilitation on physical and respiratory variables in post COVID-19 patients. DESIGN: This is a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Pulmonary rehabilitation facility. POPULATION: Seventeen post COVID-19 patients were randomized into two groups: inpatient pulmonary rehabilitation (IPR) or home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (HPR). METHODS: The comparison of the two rehabilitation methods relied on questionnaires, physical tests and the evaluation of several respiratory parameters. A 2-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) with repeated measures was performed to assess the effects of time (pre- vs. post-rehabilitation), group (IPR vs. HPR) and their interaction for all parameters. RESULTS: The main result of this study is that distance covered in the 6MWT (6MWD) shows significant improvements, between pre- and postrehabilitation program in both groups (+95 m in IPR group vs.+72 m in HPR group, P<0.001) with no significant interaction between time and group (P=0.420). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that home-based pulmonary rehabilitation would be as efficient as IPR to decrease physical sequelae in post COVID-19 patients. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: It is possible to suggest both methods (home-based rehabilitation or inpatient pulmonary rehabilitation) according to the specificities of each patient and depending on hospital saturation. The choice of one or the other method should not be made to the detriment of the patient.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica , Humanos , Doença Pulmonar Obstrutiva Crônica/reabilitação , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/complicações , Hospitais , Terapia por Exercício/métodos , Pacientes Internados , Qualidade de Vida
2.
Trials ; 19(1): 49, 2018 Jan 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29347991

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Research exploring the effects of physical exercise in auto-immune myasthenia gravis (MG) is scarce. The few existing studies present methodological shortcomings limiting the conclusions and generalisability of results. It is hypothesised that exercise could have positive physical, psychological as well as immunomodulatory effects and may be a beneficial addition to current pharmacological management of this chronic disease. The aim of this study is to evaluate the benefits on perceived quality of life (QOL) and physical fitness of a home-based physical exercise program compared to usual care, for patients with stabilised, generalised auto-immune MG. METHODS: MGEX is a multi-centre, interventional, randomised, single-blind, two-arm parallel group, controlled trial. Forty-two patients will be recruited, aged 18-70 years. Following a three-month observation period, patients will be randomised into a control or experimental group. The experimental group will undertake a 40-min home-based physical exercise program using a rowing machine, three times a week for three months, as an add-on to usual care. The control group will receive usual care with no additional treatment. All patients will be followed up for a further three months. The primary outcome is the mean change in MGQOL-15-F score between three and six months (i.e. pre-intervention and immediately post-intervention periods). The MGQOL-15-F is an MG-specific patient-reported QOL questionnaire. Secondary outcomes include the evaluation of deficits and functional limitations via MG-specific clinical scores (Myasthenia Muscle Score and MG-Activities of Daily Living scale), muscle force and fatigue, respiratory function, free-living physical activity as well as evaluations of anxiety, depression, self-esteem and overall QOL with the WHO-QOL BREF questionnaire. Exercise workload will be assessed as well as multiple safety measures (ECG, biological markers, medication type and dosage and any disease exacerbation or crisis). DISCUSSION: This is the largest randomised controlled trial to date evaluating the benefits and tolerance of physical exercise in this patient population. The comprehensive evaluations using standardised outcome measures should provide much awaited information for both patients and the scientific community. This study is ongoing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02066519 . Registered on 13 January 2014.


Assuntos
Terapia por Exercício/métodos , Tolerância ao Exercício , Músculo Esquelético/fisiopatologia , Miastenia Gravis/terapia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Terapia por Exercício/efeitos adversos , Feminino , França , Nível de Saúde , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Multicêntricos como Assunto , Miastenia Gravis/diagnóstico , Miastenia Gravis/fisiopatologia , Medidas de Resultados Relatados pelo Paciente , Aptidão Física , Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Método Simples-Cego , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA