Comparison of a structured home-based rehabilitation programme with conventional supervised pulmonary rehabilitation: a randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Standardised home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programmes offer an alternative model to centre-based supervised PR for which uptake is currently poor. We determined if a structured home-based unsupervised PR programme was non-inferior to supervised centre-based PR for participants with COPD. METHODS: A total of 287 participants with COPD who were referred to PR (187 male, mean (SD) age 68 (8.86) years, FEV1% predicted 48.34 (17.92)) were recruited. They were randomised to either centre-based PR or a structured unsupervised home-based PR programme including a hospital visit with a healthcare professional trained in motivational interviewing, a self-management manual and two telephone calls. Fifty-eight (20%) withdrew from the centre-based group and 51 (18%) from the home group. The primary outcome was dyspnoea domain in the chronic respiratory disease questionnaire (Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire Self-Report; CRQ-SR) at 7 weeks. Measures were taken blinded. We undertook a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) complete case analysis, comparing groups according to original random allocation and with complete data at follow-up. The non-inferiority margin was 0.5 units. RESULTS: There was evidence of significant gains in CRQ-dyspnoea at 7 weeks in both home and centre-based groups. There was inconclusive evidence that home-based PR was non-inferior to PR in dyspnoea (mean group difference, mITT: -0.24, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.12, p=0.18), favouring the centre group at 7 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: The standardised home-based programme provides benefits in dyspnoea. Further evidence is needed to definitively determine if the health benefits of the standardised home-based programme are non-inferior or equivalent to supervised centre-based rehabilitation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN81189044.

An economic evaluation of a self-management programme of activity, coping and education for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

The aim was to undertake a cost-utility analysis of a self-management programme of activity, coping and education (SPACE) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The analysis was conducted alongside a six-month randomized controlled trial in 30 primary care settings. The economic analysis used data from 184 patients with confirmed diagnosis of COPD, forced expiratory volume in one second/forced vital capacity ratio <0.7 and with grade 2-5 on the Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale. Participants received either a self-management programme consisting of an education manual (SPACE for COPD) and consultation or usual care. Six-month costs were estimated from the National Health Service and Personal Social Services perspective and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were calculated based on patient responses at baseline and six months.The mean difference in costs between usual care and SPACE FOR COPD programme was -£27.18 (95% confidence interval (CI); -£122.59 to £68.25) while mean difference in QALYs was -0.10 (95% CI; -0.17 to -0.02). The results suggest that the intervention is more costly and more effective than usual care. The probability of the intervention being cost-effective was 97% at a threshold of £20,000/QALY gained. We conclude that the SPACE FOR COPD programme is cost-effective compared to usual care.

Do we need a practice incremental shuttle walk test for patients with interstitial lung disease referred for pulmonary rehabilitation?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patients with interstitial lung disease (ILD) are increasingly being referred to pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) where exercise capacity is measured, often by an incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT). These patients are frequently limited by severe dyspnoea and exertional desaturation. Available guidelines suggest two ISWT are needed; however, this is time consuming and it has not been reported whether a practice ISWT is necessary in ILD. We aimed to investigate if a practice ISWT is needed for patients with ILD referred to PR. METHODS: Patients with ILD who attended a PR assessment performed two ISWT as per standard protocol. Hospital notes were retrieved and relevant data extracted and validated. Endurance shuttle walk test (ESWT) level was calculated at 85% VO2 peak as estimated from the first ISWT (ISWT 1) and second ISWT (ISWT 2). RESULTS: Forty-three patients were included (18 with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis). There was a mean change of 28.84 (31.71) m between the two ISWT (P < 0.001) with 72.1% of patients walking further on ISWT 2. A Bland-Altman plot showed good agreement between the ISWTs; however, the limits of agreement were wide. There was a significant difference in ESWT levels (P < 0.001) when calculated from ISWT 1 and ISWT 2. ISWT 1 distance, post-ISWT 1 heart rate and baseline Borg breathlessness score were significant variables (P < 0.05) in linear regression, but this only explained 42.6% of the variance (R(2) 0.426). CONCLUSIONS: A practice ISWT is necessary to accurately assess exercise capacity. It was not possible to predict which patients did not need to complete two ISWT.

Is a practice incremental shuttle walk test needed for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease admitted to hospital for an acute exacerbation?

BACKGROUND: The incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT) assesses exercise capacity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients. Guidelines suggest that 2 ISWTs should be performed. However, in inpatients with an acute exacerbation, it is unknown if 2 ISWTs are required. OBJECTIVE: To investigate if a practice ISWT is needed for inpatients with an acute COPD exacerbation. METHODS: Patients admitted to hospital with an acute exacerbation completed 2 ISWTs prior to discharge. Patients provided informed consent and were included if they used the same oxygen and mobility aid (if any) between tests. RESULTS: Thirty-nine inpatients with COPD were included with a mean (SD) forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) of 1.1 litres (0.5) [42.5% predicted (13.2)] and a median (interquartile range) Medical Research Council dyspnoea grade of 4 (3-5). Participants achieved 88.2 m (96.7) on ISWT1, and there was a statistically significant increase of 14.1 m (28.4) for ISWT2 (p < 0.05). Multiple regression explained 98.8% of the variance (F(8-22) p < 0.001, R2 = 0.988) between ISWTs using age, FEV1/forced vital capacity (FVC)%, FVC, resting oxygen saturation, resting heart rate (HR), ISWT1 distance, ISWT1 post-HR and post-Rated Perceived Exertion (p < 0.05). Using this equation to calculate predicted ISWT2, there was good agreement and no significant difference between this and actual ISWT2 (0.01 m, p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There was a small but statistically significant increase between ISWTs, which was below the minimal clinically important difference but would have had consequences for exercise prescription. This exploratory work has shown that we may be able to predict the difference between ISWTs using a multiple regression equation which could substitute the need for a second ISWT; this needs to be confirmed prospectively.

A self-management programme for COPD: a randomised controlled trial.

Studies of programmes of self-management support for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have been inconclusive. The Self-Management Programme of Activity, Coping and Education (SPACE) FOR COPD is a 6-week self-management intervention for COPD, and this study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of this intervention in primary care. A single-blind randomised controlled trial recruited people with COPD from primary care and randomised participants to receive usual care or SPACE FOR COPD. Outcome measures were performed at baseline, 6 weeks and 6 months. The primary outcome was symptom burden, measured by the self-reported Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ-SR) dyspnoea domain. Secondary outcomes included other domains of the CRQ-SR, shuttle walking tests, disease knowledge, anxiety, depression, self-efficacy, smoking status and healthcare utilisation. 184 people with COPD were recruited and randomised. At 6 weeks, there were significant differences between groups in CRQ-SR dyspnoea, fatigue and emotion scores, exercise performance, anxiety, and disease knowledge. At 6 months, there was no between-group difference in change in CRQ-SR dyspnoea. Exercise performance, anxiety and smoking status were significantly different between groups at 6 months, in favour of the intervention. This brief self-management intervention did not improve dyspnoea over and above usual care at 6 months; however, there were gains in anxiety, exercise performance, and disease knowledge.

Development of a training program to support health care professionals to deliver the SPACE for COPD self-management program.

BACKGROUND: With the growing burden of COPD and associated morbidity and mortality, a need for self-management has been identified. The Self-management Programme of Activity, Coping and Education for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (SPACE for COPD) manual was developed to support self-management in COPD patients. Currently, there is no literature available regarding health care professionals' training needs when supporting patients with COPD on self-management. AIM: This study sought to identify these needs to inform, design and develop a training program for health care professionals being trained to deliver a self-management program in COPD. METHODS: Fourteen health care professionals from both primary and secondary care COPD services participated in face-to-face semistructured interviews. Thematic analysis was used to produce a framework and identify training needs and views on delivery of the SPACE for COPD self-management program. Components of training were web-based knowledge training, with pre-and posttraining knowledge questionnaires, and a 1-day program to introduce the self-management manual. Feedback was given after training to guide the development of the training program. RESULTS: Health care professionals were able to identify areas where they required increased knowledge to support patients. This was overwhelming in aspects of COPD seen to be outside of their current clinical role. Skills in goal setting and behavioral change were not elicited as a training need, suggesting a lack of understanding of components of supporting self-management. An increase in knowledge of COPD was demonstrated following the training program. CONCLUSION: Both knowledge and skill gaps existed in those who would deliver self-management. Analysis of this has enabled a training program to be designed to address these gaps and enable health care professionals to support patients in self-management.

Can a supported self-management program for COPD upon hospital discharge reduce readmissions? A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with COPD experience exacerbations that may require hospitalization. Patients do not always feel supported upon discharge and frequently get readmitted. A Self-management Program of Activity, Coping, and Education for COPD (SPACE for COPD), a brief self-management program, may help address this issue. OBJECTIVE: To investigate if SPACE for COPD employed upon hospital discharge would reduce readmission rates at 3 months, compared with usual care. METHODS: This is a prospective, single-blinded, two-center trial (ISRCTN84599369) with participants admitted for an exacerbation, randomized to usual care or SPACE for COPD. Measures, including health-related quality of life and exercise capacity, were taken at baseline (hospital discharge) and at 3 months. The primary outcome measure was respiratory readmission at 3 months. RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients were recruited (n=39 to both groups). No differences were found in readmission rates or mortality at 3 months between the groups. Ten control patients were readmitted within 30 days compared to five patients in the intervention group (P>0.05). Both groups significantly improved their exercise tolerance and Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ-SR) results, with between-group differences approaching statistical significance for CRQ-dyspnea and CRQ-emotion, in favor of the intervention. The "Ready for Home" survey revealed that patients receiving the intervention reported feeling better able to arrange their life to cope with COPD, knew when to seek help about feeling unwell, and more often took their medications as prescribed, compared to usual care (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: SPACE for COPD did not reduce readmission rates at 3 months above that of usual care. However, encouraging results were seen in secondary outcomes for those receiving the intervention. Importantly, SPACE for COPD appears to be safe and may help prevent readmission with 30 days.

Important, misunderstood, and challenging: a qualitative study of nurses' and allied health professionals' perceptions of implementing self-management for patients with COPD.

BACKGROUND: In light of the growing burden of COPD, there is increasing focus on the role of self-management for this population. Currently, self-management varies widely. Little is known either about nurses' and allied health professionals' (AHPs') understanding and provision of self-management in clinical practice. This study explores nurses' and AHPs' understanding and implementation of supported COPD self-management within routine clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nurses and AHPs participated in face-to-face semistructured interviews to explore their understanding and provision of COPD self-management, as well as their perceptions of the challenges to providing such care. Purposive sampling was used to select participants from a range of professions working within primary, community, and secondary care settings. Three researchers independently analyzed each transcript using a thematic approach. RESULTS: A total of 14 participants were interviewed. Nurses and AHPs viewed self-management as an important aspect of COPD care, but often misunderstood what it involved, leading to variation in practice. A number of challenges to supporting self-management were identified, which related to lack of time, lack of insight regarding training needs, and assumptions regarding patients' perceived self-management abilities. CONCLUSION: Nurses and AHPs delivering self-management require clear guidance, training in the use of effective self-management skills, and education that challenges their preconceptions regarding patients. The design of health care services also needs to consider the practical barriers to COPD self-management support for the implementation of such interventions to be successful.

Exercise capacity and physical activity in patients with COPD and healthy subjects classified as Medical Research Council dyspnea scale grade 2.

PURPOSE: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are often classified by Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnea grade and comparisons thus made to healthy individuals. The MRC grade of a healthy population is assumed to be grade 1, although this may be inaccurate. Physical activity and exercise capacity are not well-defined for those with MRC grade 2. This study was undertaken to establish whether there are differences in physical activity and exercise capacity between individuals with COPD and healthy controls, who have all assessed themselves as MRC grade 2. METHODS: Patients with COPD (n = 83) and 19 healthy controls, with a self-selected MRC grade of 2, completed the Incremental Shuttle Walk Test (ISWT) and wore a SenseWear (BodyMedia, Pittsburgh, PA) activity monitor for 12 hours for 2 weekdays. RESULTS: Adjusting for age, step count and ISWT were significantly reduced for those with COPD, compared with healthy controls (P < .05). Patients with COPD achieved mean (SD) 425.5 (131.3) m on ISWT and took 6022 (3276) steps per day compared with 647.8 (146.3) m and 9462 (4141) steps per day for healthy controls. For subjects achieving 10 000 steps per day, 8 (42.11%) healthy controls achieved this level compared with 7 (8.43%) patients with COPD (P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Healthy individuals may report functional limitations and categorize themselves as MRC grade 2. However, despite both groups subjectively considering themselves similarly functionally limited, exercise capacity and physical activity were significantly reduced in patients with COPD compared with healthy participants. This highlights the importance of early interventions to increase physical performance and prevent functional decline for patients with COPD.

Pulmonary rehabilitation and interstitial lung disease: aiding the referral decision.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists regarding the effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) within interstitial lung disease (ILD). Oxygen is frequently prescribed for these patients but has not been explored in the context of PR. The aim of this study was to compare short-term outcomes of PR and 2-year mortality in patients with ILD, who use home oxygen against those without oxygen. METHODS: Using an observational cohort design and principles of comparative effectiveness research, data were collected from patients with ILD referred for a 7-week outpatient PR program. Hospital notes were reviewed, oxygen use was documented, and survival status was recorded at 2 years. Exercise capacity and quality of life were measured at baseline and discharge from PR. RESULTS: One hundred fifteen patients were identified (96 with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis); 43 used oxygen and 72 were nonoxygen users. Nonoxygen users improved their Incremental Shuttle Walk Test more than oxygen users (P < .05). Significant improvements were found after PR for nonoxygen users (Incremental Shuttle Walk Test 39.0 ± 54.3 m, Endurance Shuttle Walk Test 319 ± 359 seconds, Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ)-Dyspnea 0.74 ± 0.94, CRQ-Fatigue 0.73 ± 1.15, CRQ-Emotion 0.61 ± 0.98, CRQ-Mastery 0.55 ± 1.01), whereas only Endurance Shuttle Walk Test (197 ± 287 seconds) improved for oxygen users (P < .05). Significant differences were found in survival rates between the 2 groups, 2 years after initial PR assessment (hazard ratio, oxygen users vs nonoxygen users: 2.7 [95% CI = 1.41 - 4.98], P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Oxygen users gain less from PR and have a higher mortality rate than nonoxygen users. These results should be used to aid discussion between patients and clinicians regarding referral to PR and the anticipated benefits.