Perceived Autonomy Support in Telerehabilitation by People With Chronic Respiratory Disease: A Mixed Methods Study.

BACKGROUND: Autonomy-supportive health environments can assist patients in achieving behavior change and can influence adherence positively. Telerehabilitation may increase access to rehabilitation services, but creating an autonomy-supportive environment may be challenging. RESEARCH QUESTION: To what degree does telerehabilitation provide an autonomy-supportive environment? What is the patient experience of an 8-week telerehabilitation program? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Individuals undertaking telerehabilitation or center-based pulmonary rehabilitation within a larger randomized controlled equivalence trial completed the Health Care Climate Questionnaire (HCCQ; short form) to assess perceived autonomy support. Telerehabilitation participants were invited 1:1 to undertake semistructured interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded thematically to identify major themes and subthemes. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-six participants (n = 69 telerehabilitation) completed the HCCQ and 30 telerehabilitation participants (42%) undertook interviews. HCCQ summary scores indicated that participants strongly agreed that the telerehabilitation environment was autonomy supportive, which was similar to center-based participants (HCCQ summary score, P = .6; individual HCCQ items, P ≥ .3). Telerehabilitation interview data supported quantitative findings identifying five major themes, with subthemes, as follows: (1) making it easier to participate in pulmonary rehabilitation, because telerehabilitation was convenient, saved time and money, and offered flexibility; (2) receiving support in a variety of ways, including opportunities for peer support and receiving an individualized program guided by expert staff; (3) internal and external motivation to exercise as a consequence of being in a supervised group, seeing results for effort, and being inspired by others; (4) achieving success through provision of equipment and processes to prepare and support operation of equipment and technology; and (5) after the rehabilitation program, continuing to exercise, but dealing with feelings of loss. INTERPRETATION: Telerehabilitation was perceived as an autonomy-supportive environment, in part by making it easier to undertake pulmonary rehabilitation. Support for behavior change, understanding, and motivation were derived from clinicians and patient-peers. The extent to which autonomy support translates into ongoing self-management and behavior change is not clear. TRIAL REGISTRY: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; No.: ACTRN12616000360415; URL: https://anzctr.org.au/.

Telerehabilitation for chronic respiratory disease: a randomised controlled equivalence trial.

RATIONALE: Pulmonary 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. METHODS: A 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. RESULTS: 142 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). CONCLUSION: telerehabilitation 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 NUMBER: ACtelerehabilitationN12616000360415.

Application of the Modified Incremental Step Test for Pulmonary Rehabilitation.

OBJECTIVE: A Modified Incremental Step Test (MIST) performed in the home may facilitate entirely home-based pulmonary rehabilitation programs. The aims of this study were to investigate the reliability and responsiveness, and the utility of the MIST for exercise prescription in people with stable chronic lung disease. METHODS: The MIST was undertaken at the center and home in random order, before and after pulmonary rehabilitation, with 2 tests at each time point. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient. Responsiveness was evaluated as effect size. The minimal important difference was appraised using distribution and anchor-based methods. In a substudy, physiological responses to MIST were measured by a portable metabolic system, followed by a constant step rate test at 60% of peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak), to evaluate utility for exercise prescription. RESULTS: Forty-six participants were recruited (29% of eligible candidates). There was excellent reliability for number of steps recorded in home- and center-based settings (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.954, 95% CI = 0.915-0.976). A small-moderate effect size was demonstrated following pulmonary rehabilitation (0.34), and the minimal detectable change was 7 steps. All participants in the substudy achieved 60% of VO2peak and achieved steady state by the fourth minute, with 60% of VO2peak corresponding to a mean 37% (95% CI = 29-44) of the MIST final level. CONCLUSIONS: The MIST is reliable and responsive to pulmonary rehabilitation in people with stable chronic respiratory disease. It provides new opportunities to assess exercise capacity, prescribe exercise training, and reassess exercise program outcomes in environments where established field walking tests are not feasible. IMPACT: Pulmonary rehabilitation is a highly effective treatment that is underutilized worldwide. Home-based pulmonary rehabilitation may improve access for patients and deliver equivalent clinical outcomes but is limited by the availability of a robust exercise test that can be used at home to assess exercise capacity and prescribe training intensity. This study tested the clinimetric properties of the MIST and demonstrated a new way to assess exercise capacity, prescribe exercise training of an appropriate intensity, and reassess exercise capacity in environments where established field walking tests are not feasible.

Prevalence and Clinical Implications of Chronic Rhinosinusitis in People with Bronchiectasis: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS) is an extrapulmonary manifestation in some individuals with bronchiectasis, but the prevalence of CRS in this population and its clinical impact has not been systematically reviewed. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the prevalence of CRS in bronchiectasis and identify its clinical implications. METHODS: Four databases were searched from inception to August 2018 for studies reporting the prevalence and/or clinical impact of CRS in individuals with bronchiectasis. Clinical outcomes included health-related quality of life (HRQOL), severity of bronchiectasis, lung function, clinical and psychological symptoms, exacerbation frequency, and health care utilization. Two independent reviewers rated the quality of evidence using the risk of bias for prevalence trials tool. RESULTS: Of 80 studies identified, 8 studies with 797 participants (all adults) were included. Mean FEV1 % predicted was 77.7%. Overall, 5 studies were classed as low risk of bias and 3 were of moderate risk of bias. The pooled prevalence of clinical and/or radiological CRS was 62% (95% CI, 50%-74%). CRS was associated with a greater degree of bronchiectasis severity, poorer HRQOL, reduction in smell detection, elevated levels of inflammatory markers, and reduced time to first exacerbation. However, the association with airflow obstruction was inconsistent and there was no impact on anxiety or depression. CONCLUSIONS: CRS is present in 62% of adults with bronchiectasis. Its presence is associated with poorer HRQOL, greater degree of disease severity, and more extensive radiological bronchiectasis.