Clinically important changes and adverse events with centre-based or home-based pulmonary rehabilitation in chronic respiratory disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objectives: To determine the proportion of people who achieve minimal clinically important differences (MCID) with centre-based or home-based pulmonary rehabilitation and to synthesise data on adverse events.Methods: Cochrane reviews and electronic databases were searched to identify randomised trials comparing centre-based to home-based pulmonary rehabilitation, or either model to usual care, in people with chronic respiratory disease. Primary outcomes were the proportion of participants achieving MCIDs in exercise capacity and disease-specific quality of life. Secondary outcomes were symptoms and adverse events. Cochrane Risk of Bias 1.0 and GRADE were used to assess the risk of bias and certainty of evidence respectively.Results: Forty-nine trials were eligible. Compared to usual care, a higher proportion of pulmonary rehabilitation participants achieved the MCID for exercise capacity (6MWT: 47% vs 20%, p = 0.11), dyspnoea (43% vs 29%, p = 0.0001), fatigue (48% vs 27%, p = 0.0002) and emotional function (37% vs 25%, p = 0.02), with all of these between group differences statistically significant except for exercise capacity. There were no differences between centre-based and home-based pulmonary rehabilitation in the proportion of participants who achieved MCIDs (34%- 58% across studies). Ninety percent of trials reported no adverse events. Certainty of evidence was low-to- moderate with all outcomes except for CRQ-mastery (centre-based vs home-based pulmonary rehabilitation, or pulmonary rehabilitation vs usual care in COPD), ESWT (pulmonary rehabilitation vs usual care in COPD) and 6MWT (pulmonary rehabilitation vs usual care in bronchiectasis) where evidence was very uncertain.Discussion: Clinically meaningful outcomes are achieved by similar proportions of participants in centre-based and home-based pulmonary rehabilitation, with few adverse events. Reporting of trial outcomes according to MCIDs is necessary for informed decision making regarding pulmonary rehabilitation models.

A shared decision-making intervention between health care professionals and individuals undergoing Pulmonary Rehabilitation: An iterative development process with qualitative methods.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) services typically offer programmes to support individuals living with COPD make rehabilitation choices that best meet their needs, however, uptake remains low. Shared Decision-Making (SDM; e.g., Patient Decision Aids (PtDA)) interventions increase informed and values-based decision-making between individuals and healthcare professionals (HCPs). We aimed to develop an intervention to facilitate PR SDM which was acceptable to individuals living with COPD and PR HCPs. METHODS: An iterative development process involving qualitative methods was adopted. Broad overarching frameworks included: complex intervention development framework, the multiple stakeholder decision making support model, and the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. Development included: assembling a steering group, outlining the scope for the PtDA, collating data to inform the PtDA design, prototype development, alpha testing with individuals with COPD (n = 4) and PR HCPs (n = 8), PtDA finalisation, and design and development of supporting components. This took nine months. RESULTS: The PtDA was revised six times before providing an acceptable, comprehensible, and usable format for all stakeholders. Supporting components (decision coaching training and a consultation prompt) were necessary to upskill PR HCPs in SDM and implement the intervention into the PR pathway. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed a three-component SDM intervention (a PtDA, decision coaching training for PR healthcare professionals, and a consultation prompt) to support individuals living with COPD make informed and values-based decision about PR together with their PR healthcare professional. Clear implementation strategies are outlined which should support its integration into the PR pathway.

Protected characteristics reported in pulmonary rehabilitation: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: An individual's characteristics are reported to influence access, completion and outcomes of pulmonary rehabilitation and may contribute to health inequalities. Many countries have policies to promote equity among individuals' characteristics, including the UK Equality Act 2010 which lists nine protected characteristics (age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation). OBJECTIVES: To describe the extent to which UK Equality Act 2010 protected characteristics have been collected and reported in UK studies and audits of pulmonary rehabilitation. METHODS: A scoping review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews guidelines was conducted using five databases. UK studies and audits collecting data on pulmonary rehabilitation from 1 October 2010 (date of Equality Act 2010 inception) were eligible. The protected characteristics collected and how they were reported were extracted. RESULTS: Out of 45 included studies and audits (41 studies and four audits), 98% (k=44) reported age. Sex was reported in 40% (k=18), and 20% (k=9) reported gender with only male and female categories. Half (50%, k=2) of audits reported gender with male, female and transgender categories. Race was reported through ethnicity in 2% (k=1) of studies and 75% (k=3) of audits. No studies or audits explicitly reported disability, but all reported measures indicating disease severity (e.g. forced expiratory volume in 1 s % predicted: 67%, k=30). No studies or audits reported marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, religion or belief or sexual orientation. CONCLUSIONS: Protected characteristics are not commonly reported or are inconsistently reported in UK pulmonary rehabilitation studies and audits. Without reporting these characteristics, health inequalities in pulmonary rehabilitation will remain unclear.

Evidence for exercise-based interventions across 45 different long-term conditions: an overview of systematic reviews.

Background: Almost half of the global population face significant challenges from long-term conditions (LTCs) resulting in substantive health and socioeconomic burden. Exercise is a potentially key intervention in effective LTC management. Methods: In this overview of systematic reviews (SRs), we searched six electronic databases from January 2000 to October 2023 for SRs assessing health outcomes (mortality, hospitalisation, exercise capacity, disability, frailty, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and physical activity) related to exercise-based interventions in adults (aged >18 years) diagnosed with one of 45 LTCs. Methodological quality was assessed using AMSTAR-2. International Prospective Resister of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) ID: CRD42022319214. Findings: Forty-two SRs plus three supplementary RCTs were included, providing 990 RCTs in 936,825 people across 39 LTCs. No evidence was identified for six LTCs. Predominant outcome domains were HRQoL (82% of SRs/RCTs) and exercise capacity (66%); whereas disability, mortality, physical activity, and hospitalisation were less frequently reported (≤25%). Evidence supporting exercise-based interventions was identified in 25 LTCs, was unclear for 13 LTCs, and for one LTC suggested no effect. No SRs considered multimorbidity in the delivery of exercise. Methodological quality varied: critically-low (33%), low (26%), moderate (26%), and high (12%). Interpretation: Exercise-based interventions improve HRQoL and exercise capacity across numerous LTCs. Key evidence gaps included limited mortality and hospitalisation data and consideration of multimorbidity impact on exercise-based interventions. Funding: This study was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR; Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (multimorbidity)-NIHR202020).

A survey exploring the needs, preferences, and challenges of the key stakeholders for participating in and developing pulmonary rehabilitation in Pune, India.

Considering a huge burden of chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs) in India, there is a need for locally relevant Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) services. This cross-sectional survey was aimed to explore the interest, needs and challenges among various stakeholders for PR in Pune city, India. At the outpatient respiratory medicine department of a multi-speciality hospital in Pune, India, 403 eligible people with CRDs were invited to participate in the survey, of which 370 (92%) responded and agreed to participate. (220 males, mean ± SD age 56 ± 15 years). Out of the 370, 323 (87%) people with CRDs were keen to attend PR. In a multiple selection question, there was inclination towards paper-based manuals home-based (70%) and web-based (84%) programs. 207 healthcare providers (HCPs), including physicians, pulmonologists and physiotherapists involved in the care of people living with CRDs across Pune city were invited to participate in the survey. Out of the 207, (80%) of the HCPs believed that PR was an effective management strategy and highlighted the lack of information on PR and need for better understanding of PR (48%) and its referral process. The surveyed stakeholders are ready to take up PR, identifying specific needs around further knowledge of PR, modes of delivery, and referral processes, that could potentially feed the development of relevant PR programs in the Indian healthcare settings.

Interdisciplinary perspectives on multimorbidity in Africa: Developing an expanded conceptual model.

Multimorbidity is an emerging challenge for health systems globally. It is commonly defined as the co-occurrence of two or more chronic conditions in one person, but its meaning remains a lively area of academic debate, and the utility of the concept beyond high-income settings is uncertain. This article presents the findings from an interdisciplinary research initiative that drew together 60 academic and applied partners working in 10 African countries to answer the questions: how useful is the concept of multimorbidity within Africa? Can the concept be adapted to context to optimise its transformative potentials? During a three-day concept-building workshop, we investigated how the definition of multimorbidity was understood across diverse disciplinary and regional perspectives, evaluated the utility and limitations of existing concepts and definitions, and considered how to build a more context-sensitive, cross-cutting description of multimorbidity. This iterative process was guided by the principles of grounded theory and involved focus- and whole-group discussions during the workshop, thematic coding of workshop discussions, and further post-workshop development and refinement. Three thematic domains emerged from workshop discussions: the current focus of multimorbidity on constituent diseases; the potential for revised concepts to centre the priorities, needs, and social context of people living with multimorbidity (PLWMM); and the need for revised concepts to respond to varied conceptual priorities amongst stakeholders. These themes fed into the development of an expanded conceptual model that centres the catastrophic impacts multimorbidity can have for PLWMM, families and support structures, service providers, and health systems.

Changes in fatigue symptoms following an exercise-based rehabilitation programme for patients with long COVID.

Background: There is evidence to support COVID-19 rehabilitation programmes improving persistent COVID-19 symptoms; however, there is concern that therapies that include an exercise component may increase fatigue and post-exertional symptom exacerbation (PESE). The objectives of the present study were to determine the effect of a 6-week COVID-19 rehabilitation programme on fatigue and PESE in individuals with ongoing COVID-19 symptoms. Methods: After a routine medical assessment, individuals with persistent COVID-19 symptoms were enrolled on a 6-week COVID-19 specific rehabilitation programme. The programme included symptom-titrated exercise, education and self-management advice. Fatigue was assessed pre- and post-programme using the Functional Assessment Chronic Illness Therapy Fatigue questionnaire (FACIT). Exercise capacity (Incremental and Endurance Shuttle Walking Test (ISWT and ESWT)) and PESE (DePaul Symptom Questionnaire (DSQ)) were also assessed pre- and post-programme. Composite scores were calculated for the frequency and severity domains of the DSQ. Results: 148 patients (median (IQR) age 59 (49-72) years, 82 (55%) female, 81 (54%) hospitalised) completed the COVID-19 rehabilitation programme. FACIT score was reduced pre- to post-programme by a mean (CI) change of -5 (-7- -4); p<0.01. Exercise capacity increased by 82 (65-99) m for the ISWT and 398 (333-462) s for the ESWT (n=148). PESE was assessed in 44 patients. The DSQ frequency and severity composite score improved by 20 (13-28) and 19 (13-26) points, respectively (p<0.01, n=44). Conclusion: These data demonstrate the potential benefits of a COVID-19 rehabilitation programme in improving fatigue, exercise capacity and symptom exacerbation in those with persistent COVID-19 symptoms.

Association of latent class analysis-derived multimorbidity clusters with adverse health outcomes in patients with multiple long-term conditions: comparative results across three UK cohorts.

Background: It remains unclear how to meaningfully classify people living with multimorbidity (multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs)), beyond counting the number of conditions. This paper aims to identify clusters of MLTCs in different age groups and associated risks of adverse health outcomes and service use. Methods: Latent class analysis was used to identify MLTCs clusters in different age groups in three cohorts: Secure Anonymised Information Linkage Databank (SAIL) (n = 1,825,289), UK Biobank (n = 502,363), and the UK Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) (n = 49,186). Incidence rate ratios (IRR) for MLTC clusters were computed for: all-cause mortality, hospitalisations, and general practice (GP) use over 10 years, using <2 MLTCs as reference. Information on health outcomes and service use were extracted for a ten year follow up period (between 01st Jan 2010 and 31st Dec 2019 for UK Biobank and UKHLS, and between 01st Jan 2011 and 31st Dec 2020 for SAIL). Findings: Clustering MLTCs produced largely similar results across different age groups and cohorts. MLTC clusters had distinct associations with health outcomes and service use after accounting for LTC counts, in fully adjusted models. The largest associations with mortality, hospitalisations and GP use in SAIL were observed for the "Pain+" cluster in the age-group 18-36 years (mortality IRR = 4.47, hospitalisation IRR = 1.84; GP use IRR = 2.87) and the "Hypertension, Diabetes & Heart disease" cluster in the age-group 37-54 years (mortality IRR = 4.52, hospitalisation IRR = 1.53, GP use IRR = 2.36). In UK Biobank, the "Cancer, Thyroid disease & Rheumatoid arthritis" cluster in the age group 37-54 years had the largest association with mortality (IRR = 2.47). Cardiometabolic clusters across all age groups, pain/mental health clusters in younger groups, and cancer and pulmonary related clusters in older age groups had higher risk for all outcomes. In UKHLS, MLTC clusters were not significantly associated with higher risk of adverse outcomes, except for the hospitalisation in the age-group 18-36 years. Interpretation: Personalising care around MLTC clusters that have higher risk of adverse outcomes may have important implications for practice (in relation to secondary prevention), policy (with allocation of health care resources), and research (intervention development and targeting), for people living with MLTCs. Funding: This study was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR; Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (multimorbidity)-NIHR202020).

The Training to Improve Dyspnoea Study- Patient Experiences of Using a High Frequency Airway Oscillating Device.

Introduction: The High Frequency Airway Oscillating device (HFAO) was developed to help patients with COPD feel less breathless through flow resistive respiratory muscle training and fixed rate oscillations. Previous work has demonstrated that this device can improve inspiratory muscle strength over and above a sham device. Both groups improved their breathlessness and preserved clinical benefits though there were no statistically significant differences seen over and above the sham device. It is important to understand patient perceptions of using a device and how this may influence their treatment and therefore a qualitative analysis was conducted to understand participant experiences of a HFAO device. Methods: This was an exploratory qualitative analysis involving participants recruited to the Training to Improve Dyspnoea (TIDe) study. Participants completed a satisfaction survey and were invited to take part in a focus group. Focus groups were conducted by a researcher independent to the randomised controlled trial. Data was analysed independently by two researchers using inductive thematic analysis, and themes/sub-themes were agreed jointly. Data is presented in themes and sub themes and triangulated with survey response data. Results: Fourteen participants were recruited to two focus groups (71% male, mean [SD] age 64[9] years). The key themes were patient selection, device use, and investment. Patient selection explores the disease characteristics, emotional impact and management of care. Device use explores the device prescription and usage, routine and lifestyle and effectiveness. Investment covers accessibility, understanding, benefits vs participation and overall perceptions of the device. Conclusion: This research demonstrates the complexity of device interventions and that key considerations should be given to patient selection, the device use itself and, the time and cost investment required for participants to successfully implement the device into daily life.

Increasing exercise capacity and physical activity in the COPD patient.

Higher levels of exercise capacity and physical activity are desired outcomes in the comprehensive management of the COPD patient. In addition, improvements in exercise capacity and physical activity are instrumental to optimising other important therapeutic goals, such as improved health status, reduced healthcare utilisation and increased survival. Four general approaches towards increasing exercise capacity and physical activity in individuals with COPD will be discussed in this review: 1) pharmacological intervention, especially the administration of long-acting bronchodilators; 2) pulmonary rehabilitation, including exercise training and collaborative self-management; 3) behavioural interventions; and 4) web-based interventions. These are by no means the only approaches, nor are they mutually exclusive: indeed, combining them, as necessary, to meet the needs of the individual respiratory patient may promote optimal outcomes, although further research is necessary in this area.

Unravelling the complex interplay of factors behind exercise limitations and physical inactivity in COPD.

Exercise limitation and physical inactivity are known treatable traits for people with COPD. Maximising exercise capacity and keeping people physically active improves health status and survival rates among people with COPD. However, managing these two treatable traits can be extremely challenging for clinicians due to the complex intersectionality of factors influencing an individual's capacity, opportunity and motivation to engage in physical activity. This review presents the complex factors influencing exercise capacity ("can do"), levels of physical activity ("do do") and sedentary behaviours amongst people with COPD and provides practical recommendations on how clinicians can address some of these factors in practice. Most importantly, it highlights the importance of referring to pulmonary rehabilitation as a way to improve exercise capacity among people with COPD.

Understanding the lived experience of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis and how this shapes views on home-based pulmonary rehabilitation in Delhi, India.

OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) is a high-impact intervention for individuals with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) but access is limited in India. PR barriers include distance to travel, lack of service provision and lack of healthcare professionals to deliver PR, thus it is disproportionate to the immense burden of IPF in India. We explored the lived experiences of people living with IPF, family caregivers (CGs) and healthcare workers (HCWs) as well as their views towards home-based PR (HBPR) in Delhi, India. METHODS: A qualitative study using semi-structured interviews with individuals with IPF (n = 20), CGs (n = 10) and HCWs (n = 10) was conducted. Data were analysed using codebook thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three major themes were generated: (i) Health impact, which included pathophysiological changes, range of symptoms experienced, disease consequences and impact of comorbidities; (ii) Disease management, which described strategies to control the progression and overall management of IPF, such as medications and exercises; (iii) Mode of Pulmonary Rehabilitation, which described perceptions regarding HBPR, comparisons with centre-based programmes, and how HBPR may fit as part of a menu of PR delivery options. CONCLUSION: People living with IPF, family caregivers and healthcare workers were positive about the potential implementation of HBPR and suggested the development of a paper-based manual to facilitate HBPR over digital/online approaches. The content of HBPR should be sensitive to the additional impact of non-IPF health issues and challenges of reduced interactions with healthcare professionals.

Attitudes of cardiac rehabilitation and stroke teams towards integration of stroke survivors into adapted cardiac rehabilitation: A focus group study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the attitudes and beliefs of cardiac rehabilitation and stroke teams towards adapted cardiac rehabilitation, and the broader topics of exercise, healthy lifestyles and health behaviour change, for people with mild-to-moderate severity stroke in the sub-acute phase of recovery. DESIGN: Qualitative focus group-based study. SETTING: Acute and community national health service trusts. PARTICIPANTS: Stroke and cardiac rehabilitation team members. INTERVENTION: Adapted cardiac rehabilitation. MAIN MEASURES: Focus groups. Thematic analysis was applied to the transcribed data. RESULTS: Overall, 57 health professionals participated in 12 focus groups. Positive impacts for teams and stroke survivors were identified particularly confidence. However, there were negatives, barriers and adaptations identified. In addition, there was a lack of knowledge for cardiac rehabilitation teams in relation to stroke survivors and stroke teams in relation to cardiac rehabilitation, exercise and healthy lifestyles. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiac rehabilitation and stroke staff attitudes to cardiac rehabilitation for stroke survivors showed a range of benefits, negatives, barriers and adaptations needed. Confidence and knowledge of the cardiac rehabilitation and stroke teams needs to be addressed. REGISTRATION: ISRCTN65957980.

Changes in physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep following pulmonary rehabilitation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The variety of innovations to traditional centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation (CBPR), including different modes of delivery and adjuncts, are likely to lead to differential responses in physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep. OBJECTIVES: To examine the relative effectiveness of different pulmonary rehabilitation-based interventions on physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep. METHODS: Randomised trials in chronic respiratory disease involving pulmonary rehabilitation-based interventions were systematically searched for. Network meta-analyses compared interventions for changes in physical activity, sedentary behaviour and sleep in COPD. RESULTS: 46 studies were included, and analyses were performed on most common outcomes: steps per day (k=24), time spent in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA; k=12) and sedentary time (k=8). There were insufficient data on sleep outcomes (k=3). CBPR resulted in greater steps per day and MVPA and reduced sedentary time compared to usual care. CBPR+physical activity promotion resulted in greater increases in steps per day compared to both usual care and CBPR, with greater increases in MVPA and reductions in sedentary time compared to usual care, but not CBPR. Home-based pulmonary rehabilitation resulted in greater increases in steps per day and decreases in sedentary time compared to usual care. Compared to usual care, CBPR+physical activity promotion was the only intervention where the lower 95% confidence interval for steps per day surpassed the minimal important difference. No pulmonary rehabilitation-related intervention resulted in greater increases in MVPA or reductions in sedentary time compared to CBPR. CONCLUSION: The addition of physical activity promotion to pulmonary rehabilitation improves volume of physical activity, but not intensity, compared to CBPR. High risk of bias and low certainty of evidence suggests that these results should be viewed with caution.

Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM): protocol for a randomised feasibility trial.

INTRODUCTION: Personalised Exercise-Rehabilitation FOR people with Multiple long-term conditions (PERFORM) is a research programme that seeks to develop and evaluate a comprehensive exercise-based rehabilitation intervention designed for people with multimorbidity, the presence of multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs). This paper describes the protocol for a randomised trial to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the PERFORM intervention, study design and processes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A multicentre, parallel two-group randomised trial with individual 2:1 allocation to the PERFORM exercise-based intervention plus usual care (intervention) or usual care alone (control). The primary outcome of this feasibility trial will be to assess whether prespecified progression criteria (recruitment, retention, intervention adherence) are met to progress to the full randomised trial. The trial will be conducted across three UK sites and 60 people with MLTCs, defined as two or more LTCs, with at least one having evidence of the beneficial effect of exercise. The PERFORM intervention comprises an 8-week (twice a week for 6 weeks and once a week for 2 weeks) supervised rehabilitation programme of personalised exercise training and self-management education delivered by trained healthcare professionals followed by two maintenance sessions. Trial participants will be recruited over a 4.5-month period, and outcomes assessed at baseline (prerandomisation) and 3 months postrandomisation and include health-related quality of life, psychological well-being, symptom burden, frailty, exercise capacity, physical activity, sleep, cognition and serious adverse events. A mixed-methods process evaluation will assess acceptability, feasibility and fidelity of intervention delivery and feasibility of trial processes. An economic evaluation will assess the feasibility of data collection and estimate the costs of the PERFORM intervention. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The trial has been given favourable opinion by the West Midlands, Edgbaston Research Ethics Service (Ref: 23/WM/0057). Participants will be asked to give full, written consent to take part by trained researchers. Findings will be disseminated via journals, presentations and targeted communications to clinicians, commissioners, service users and patients and the public. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN68786622. PROTOCOL VERSION: 2.0 (16 May 2023).

Exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation for adults with heart failure.

BACKGROUND: People with heart failure experience substantial disease burden that includes low exercise tolerance, poor health-related quality of life (HRQoL), increased risk of mortality and hospital admission, and high healthcare costs. The previous 2018 Cochrane review reported that exercise-based cardiac rehabilitation (ExCR) compared to no exercise control shows improvement in HRQoL and hospital admission amongst people with heart failure, as well as possible reduction in mortality over the longer term, and that these reductions appear to be consistent across patient and programme characteristics. Limitations noted by the authors of this previous Cochrane review include the following: (1) most trials were undertaken in patients with heart failure with reduced (< 45%) ejection fraction (HFrEF), and women, older people, and those with heart failure with preserved (≥ 45%) ejection fraction (HFpEF) were under-represented; and (2) most trials were undertaken in a hospital or centre-based setting. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of ExCR on mortality, hospital admission, and health-related quality of life of adults with heart failure. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Web of Science without language restriction on 13 December 2021. We also checked the bibliographies of included studies, identified relevant systematic reviews, and two clinical trials registers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared ExCR interventions (either exercise only or exercise as part of a comprehensive cardiac rehabilitation) with a follow-up of six months or longer versus a no-exercise control (e.g. usual medical care). The study population comprised adults (≥ 18 years) with heart failure - either HFrEF or HFpEF. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, mortality due to heart failure, all-cause hospital admissions, heart failure-related hospital admissions, and HRQoL. Secondary outcomes were costs and cost-effectiveness. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included 60 trials (8728 participants) with a median of six months' follow-up. For this latest update, we identified 16 new trials (2945 new participants), in addition to the previously identified 44 trials (5783 existing participants). Although the existing evidence base predominantly includes patients with HFrEF, with New York Heart Association (NYHA) classes II and III receiving centre-based ExCR programmes, a growing body of trials includes patients with HFpEF with ExCR undertaken in a home-based setting. All included trials employed a usual care comparator with a formal no-exercise intervention as well as a wide range of active comparators, such as education, psychological intervention, or medical management. The overall risk of bias in the included trials was low or unclear, and we mostly downgraded the certainty of evidence of outcomes upon GRADE assessment. There was no evidence of a difference in the short term (up to 12 months' follow-up) in the pooled risk of all-cause mortality when comparing ExCR versus usual care (risk ratio (RR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 1.21; absolute effects 5.0% versus 5.8%; 34 trials, 36 comparisons, 3941 participants; low-certainty evidence). Only a few trials reported information on whether participants died due to heart failure. Participation in ExCR versus usual care likely reduced the risk of all-cause hospital admissions (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.86; absolute effects 15.9% versus 23.8%; 23 trials, 24 comparisons, 2283 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and heart failure-related hospital admissions (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.35; absolute effects 5.6% versus 6.4%; 10 trials; 10 comparisons, 911 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) in the short term. Participation in ExCR likely improved short-term HRQoL as measured by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure (MLWHF) questionnaire (lower scores indicate better HRQoL and a difference of 5 points or more indicates clinical importance; mean difference (MD) -7.39 points, 95% CI -10.30 to -4.77; 21 trials, 22 comparisons, 2699 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). When pooling HRQoL data measured by any questionnaire/scale, we found that ExCR may improve HRQoL in the short term, but the evidence is very uncertain (33 trials, 37 comparisons, 4769 participants; standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.52, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.34; very-low certainty evidence). ExCR effects appeared to be consistent across different models of ExCR delivery: centre- versus home-based, exercise dose, exercise only versus comprehensive programmes, and aerobic training alone versus aerobic plus resistance programmes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This updated Cochrane review provides additional randomised evidence (16 trials) to support the conclusions of the previous 2018 version of the review. Compared to no exercise control, whilst there was no evidence of a difference in all-cause mortality in people with heart failure, ExCR participation likely reduces the risk of all-cause hospital admissions and heart failure-related hospital admissions, and may result in important improvements in HRQoL. Importantly, this updated review provides additional evidence supporting the use of alternative modes of ExCR delivery, including home-based and digitally-supported programmes. Future ExCR trials need to focus on the recruitment of traditionally less represented heart failure patient groups including older patients, women, and those with HFpEF.

Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a web-based cardiac rehabilitation programme for people with chronic stable angina: protocol for the ACTIVATE (Angina Controlled Trial Investigating the Value of the 'Activate your heart' Therapeutic E-intervention) randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic stable angina is common and disabling. Cardiac rehabilitation is routinely offered to people following myocardial infarction or revascularisation procedures and has the potential to help people with chronic stable angina. However, there is insufficient evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness for its routine use in this patient group. The objectives of this study are to compare the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the 'Activate Your Heart' cardiac rehabilitation programme for people with chronic stable angina compared with usual care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: ACTIVATE is a multicentre, parallel-group, two-arm, superiority, pragmatic randomised controlled trial, with recruitment from primary and secondary care centres in England and Wales and a target sample size of 518 (1:1 allocation; allocation sequence by minimisation programme with built-in random element). The study uses secure web-based allocation concealment. The two treatments will be optimal usual care (control) and optimal usual care plus the 'Activate Your Heart' web-based cardiac rehabilitation programme (intervention). Outcome assessment and statistical analysis will be performed blinded; participants will be unblinded. Outcomes will be measured at baseline and at 6 and 12 months' follow-up. Primary outcome will be the UK version of Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ-UK), physical limitations domain at 12 months' follow-up. Secondary outcomes will be the remaining two domains of SAQ-UK, dyspnoea, anxiety and depression, health utility, self-efficacy, physical activity and the incremental shuttle walk test. All safety events will be recorded, and serious adverse events assessed to determine whether they are related to the intervention and expected. Concurrent economic evaluation will be cost-utility analysis from health service perspective. An embedded process evaluation will determine the mechanisms and processes that explain the implementation and impacts of the cardiac rehabilitation programme. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: North of Scotland National Health Service Research Ethics Committee approval, reference 21/NS/0115. Participants will provide written informed consent. Results will be disseminated by peer-reviewed publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN10054455.

Pulmonary Rehabilitation for People With Persistent Symptoms After COVID-19.

TOPIC IMPORTANCE: COVID-19 can cause ongoing and persistent symptoms (such as breathlessness and fatigue) that lead to reduced functional capacity. There are parallels in symptoms and functional limitations in adults with post-COVID symptoms and adults with chronic respiratory diseases. Pulmonary rehabilitation is a key treatment for adults with chronic respiratory diseases, with the aims to improve symptom management and increase functional capacity. Given the similarities in presentation and aims, a pulmonary rehabilitation program may be optimal to meet the needs of those with ongoing symptoms after COVID-19. REVIEW FINDINGS: Aerobic and strength training has shown benefit for adults living with long COVID, although there is little evidence on structured education in this population. Breathing pattern disorder is common in adults with long COVID, and considerations on treatment before rehabilitation, or alongside rehabilitation, are necessary. Considerations on postexertional malaise are important in this population, and evidence from the chronic fatigue syndrome literature supports the need for individualization of exercise programs, and considerations for those who have an adverse reaction to activity and/or exercise. SUMMARY: This narrative review summarizes the current evidence on pulmonary rehabilitation programs in a long-COVID population. Where the evidence is lacking in long COVID the supporting evidence of these programs in chronic respiratory diseases has highlighted the importance of aerobic and strength training, considerations for fatigue, potential mechanisms for immunology improvement, and management of breathing pattern disorders in these programs.

A tailored psychological intervention for anxiety and depression management in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: TANDEM RCT and process evaluation.

Background: People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease have high levels of anxiety and depression, which is associated with increased morbidity and poor uptake of effective treatments, such as pulmonary rehabilitation. Cognitive-behavioural therapy improves mental health of people with long-term conditions and could potentially increase uptake of pulmonary rehabilitation, enabling synergies that could enhance the mental health of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Aim: Our aim was to develop and evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost effectiveness of a tailored cognitive-behavioural approach intervention, which links into, and optimises the benefits of, routine pulmonary rehabilitation. Design: We carried out a pragmatic multicentre randomised controlled trial using a 1.25 : 1 ratio (intervention : control) with a parallel process evaluation, including assessment of fidelity. Setting: Twelve NHS trusts and five Clinical Commissioning Groups in England were recruited into the study. The intervention was delivered in participant's own home or at a local NHS facility, and by telephone. Participants: Between July 2017 and March 2020 we recruited adults with moderate/very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and mild/moderate anxiety and/or depression, meeting eligibility criteria for assessment for pulmonary rehabilitation. Carers of participants were invited to participate. Intervention: The cognitive-behavioural approach intervention (i.e. six to eight 40- to 60-minute sessions plus telephone support throughout pulmonary rehabilitation) was delivered by 31 trained respiratory healthcare professionals to participants prior to commencing pulmonary rehabilitation. Usual care included routine pulmonary rehabilitation referral. Main outcome measures: Co-primary outcomes were Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - anxiety and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - depression at 6 months post randomisation. Secondary outcomes at 6 and 12 months included health-related quality of life, smoking status, uptake of pulmonary rehabilitation and healthcare use. Results: We analysed results from 423 randomised participants (intervention, n = 242; control, n = 181). Forty-three carers participated. Follow-up at 6 and 12 months was 93% and 82%, respectively. Despite good fidelity for intervention delivery, mean between-group differences in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at 6 months ruled out clinically important effects (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - anxiety mean difference -0.60, 95% confidence interval -1.40 to 0.21; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale - depression mean difference -0.66, 95% confidence interval -1.39 to 0.07), with similar results at 12 months. There were no between-group differences in any of the secondary outcomes. Sensitivity analyses did not alter these conclusions. More adverse events were reported for intervention participants than for control participants, but none related to the trial. The intervention did not generate quality-of-life improvements to justify the additional cost (adjusted mean difference £770.24, 95% confidence interval -£27.91 to £1568.39) to the NHS. The intervention was well received and many participants described positive affects on their quality of life. Facilitators highlighted the complexity of participants' lives and considered the intervention to be of potential valuable; however, the intervention would be difficult to integrate within routine clinical services. Our well-powered trial delivered a theoretically designed intervention with good fidelity. The respiratory-experienced facilitators were trained to deliver a low-intensity cognitive-behavioural approach intervention, but high-intensity cognitive-behavioural therapy might have been more effective. Our broad inclusion criteria specified objectively assessed anxiety and/or depression, but participants were likely to favour talking therapies. Randomisation was concealed and blinding of outcome assessment was breached in only 15 participants. Conclusions: The tailored cognitive-behavioural approach intervention delivered with fidelity by trained respiratory healthcare professionals to people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was neither clinically effective nor cost-effective. Alternative approaches that are integrated with routine long-term condition care are needed to address the unmet, complex clinical and psychosocial needs of this group of patients. Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN59537391. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 13/146/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 1. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

People with long-standing lung problems, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, often also have anxiety and depression, which further reduces their quality of life. Two existing treatments could help. Pulmonary rehabilitation (a programme of exercise and education) improves both the physical and mental health of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Cognitive­behavioural therapy (a talking therapy) may reduce anxiety and depression. The TANDEM [Tailored intervention for Anxiety and Depression Management in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)] intervention linked these two treatments by providing talking therapy based on cognitive­behavioural therapy during the waiting time following referral for pulmonary rehabilitation. The TANDEM treatment was delivered by respiratory healthcare professionals (e.g. nurses or physiotherapists) trained to deliver the talking therapy in six to eight weekly sessions. The sessions were conducted in the participant's home (or another convenient location), with brief telephone support during the pulmonary rehabilitation. Of 423 participants recruited to the study, 242 participants received TANDEM talking therapy and 181 participants received usual care (including a referral to pulmonary rehabilitation). We measured mental health, quality of life, social life, attendance at pulmonary rehabilitation and healthcare use in both groups at 6 and 12 months. Forty-three carers joined the study and we assessed their mental well-being. We interviewed patients, carers and health professionals to find out their views and experience of the TANDEM treatment. We also examined whether or not the TANDEM treatment was good value for money. The TANDEM treatment did not improve the mental or the physical health of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In addition, the TANDEM treatment cost the NHS an extra £770 per patient, which was not good value for money. The TANDEM treatment was well received, and many participants told us how it had helped them. Heath-care professionals noted how participants did not just have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but were coping with many physical, mental and social problems. The TANDEM intervention was not effective and, therefore, other strategies will be needed to help people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and mental health problems live with their condition.