Development and implementation of the lung volume reduction pulmonary rehabilitation tool to identify eligibility for lung volume reduction in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease during pulmonary rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: Completion of pulmonary rehabilitation is recognised in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) guidelines as a key opportunity to consider systematically whether a respiratory review to assess potential suitability for a lung volume reduction (LVR) procedure might be appropriate. We describe the development of a simple decision-support tool (the LVR-PR tool) to aid clinicians working in pulmonary rehabilitation, to operationalise this process. METHODS: We took an iterative mixed methods approach, which was partnership-based and involved an initial consensus survey, focus groups and an observational study cohort at multiple pulmonary rehabilitation centres. RESULTS: Diagnosis (97%), exercise capacity (84%), breathlessness (78%) and co-morbidities (76%) were acknowledged to be essential items for assessing basic LVR eligibility. Collating prior investigations and assessing patient understanding were considered useful but not essential. Clinician concerns included; streamlining the tool; access to clinical information and investigations; and care needed around introducing LVR therapies to patients in a PR setting. Access to clearer information about LVR procedures, the clinician's role in considering eligibility and how educational resources should be delivered were identified as important themes from patient group discussions. The LVR-PR tool was considered to be feasible and valid for implementation in a variety of PR services across the UK subject to the provision of appropriate health professional training. Clinicians working in specialist LVR centres across the UK who were not otherwise involved in the development process confirmed the tool's validity using the content validity index (CVI). INTERPRETATION: The LVR-PR tool appears to be an acceptable tool that can be feasibly implemented in PR services subject to good quality educational resources for both patients and healthcare professionals.

The lay health worker-patient relationship in promoting pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in COPD: What makes it work?

Lay health workers (LHWs) can improve access to services and adherence to treatment, as well as promoting self-care and prevention. Their effect in promoting uptake and adherence in pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) has not been tested. PR is the most effective treatment for the symptoms and disability of COPD, but this effectiveness is undermined by poor rates of completion. Trained LHWs with COPD, who also have first-hand experience of PR, are well placed to help overcome the documented barriers to its completion. The relationship between LHWs and patients may be one of the keys to their effectiveness but it has been little explored. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were used with the aim of examining the LHW-patient partnership in a feasibility study of trained PR-experienced LHWs used to support COPD patients referred to PR. Twelve volunteers with COPD who completed LHW training supported 66 patients referred for PR. All 12 of these LHWs gave end-of-study interviews, 21 COPD patients supported by LHWs were also interviewed. Patients reported that the LHWs were keen to share their experiences of PR, and that this had a positive impact. The enthusiasm of the LHWs for PR was striking. The common bond between LHWs and patients of having COPD together with the LHWs positive, first-hand experience of PR were dominant and recurring themes in their relationship.

Improving uptake and completion of pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD with lay health workers: feasibility of a clinical trial.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility of a cluster randomized controlled trial to test the efficacy of lay health workers (LHWs) in improving the uptake and completion of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in the treatment of COPD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: LHWs, trained in confidentiality, role boundaries, and behavior change techniques, supported patients newly referred for PR. Interactions between LHWs and participants were recorded with smartphones. Outcomes were recruitment and retention rates of LHWs, questionnaire and interview-evaluated acceptability and analysis of intervention fidelity. RESULTS: Forty (36%) of 110 PR-experienced COPD patients applied to become LHWs. Twenty (18%) were selected for training. Twelve (11%) supported patients. Sixty-six COPD patients referred for PR received the intervention (5.5 participants per LHW). Ten LHWs were retained to the end of the study. Seventy-three percent of supported patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the intervention. LHWs delivered the intervention with appropriate style and variable fidelity. LHWs would welcome more intensive training. Based on this proof of concept, a cluster randomized controlled trial of an LHW intervention to improve uptake and completion of PR is feasible. CONCLUSION: PR-experienced COPD patients can be recruited, trained, and retained as LHWs to support participation in PR, and can deliver the intervention. Participant COPD patients found the intervention acceptable. A cluster randomized controlled clinical trial is feasible.

An evaluation of factors associated with completion and benefit from pulmonary rehabilitation in COPD.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) is an important treatment for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) but it is not established whether any baseline parameter can predict response or compliance. AIM: To identify whether baseline measures can predict who will complete the programme and who will achieve a clinically significant benefit from a Minimum Clinical Important Difference (MCID) in terms of exercise capacity and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: Data were collected prospectively from patients with COPD at their baseline assessment for an outpatient PR programme in one of eight centres across London. 'Completion' was defined as attending at least 75% of the designated PR visits and return for the follow-up evaluation. The MCID for outcome measures was based on published data. RESULTS: 787 outpatients with COPD (68.1±10.5 years old; 49.6% males) were included. Patients who completed PR (n=449, 57.1%) were significantly older with less severe airflow obstruction, lower anxiety and depression scores, less dyspnoea and better HRQoL. Only baseline CAT score (OR=0.925; 95% CI 0.879 to 0.974; p=0.003) was retained in multivariate analysis. Patients with the lowest baseline walking distance were most likely to achieve the MCID for exercise capacity. No baseline variable could independently predict achievement of an MCID in HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with better HRQoL are more likely to complete PR while worse baseline exercise performance makes the achievement of a positive MCID in exercise capacity more likely. However, no baseline parameter could predict who would benefit the most in terms of HRQoL.

Pulmonary rehabilitation and sleep quality: a before and after controlled study of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

BACKGROUND: Poor sleep quality is common in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). It is associated with poor quality of life. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) improves quality of life, exercise capacity, and anxiety and depression. Its effect on sleep quality is uncertain. AIM: To determine whether PR improves sleep quality in COPD. METHODS: A prospective controlled 'before and after' study of sleep quality in COPD patients attending a community PR programme was conducted. Sleep quality was measured using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Lung function, disease-specific quality of life (COPD assessment test--CAT), exercise capacity (incremental shuttle walk test--ISWT), and anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale--HADS) were measured. Change in sleep quality was compared with a COPD control group. RESULTS: Twenty-eight participants completed PR. The control group comprised 24 patients. Prevalence of poor sleep quality (PSQI ≥5) was 78%. There were no differences between observation and control groups in sleep quality, age or severity. Quality of life was strongly correlated with quality of sleep (r=0.64, P<0.001). PR improved the quality of life (CAT change 3.0; 95% CI, 0.7-5.3), exercise capacity (ISWT change (metres) 81.0; 15.3-146.6), anxiety (HADS score ≥8: change 2.33; 0.45-4.22), and depression (HADS score ≥8: change 2.90; 1.92-3.88). PR did not improve sleep quality (PSQI mean change 0.79; -0.35 to 1.93). CONCLUSIONS: PR did not improve sleep quality in COPD despite improving quality of life, exercise capacity, anxiety and depression. New strategies, independent of PR, are required to improve sleep quality in COPD.

Acceptability and feasibility of pulmonary rehabilitation for COPD: a community qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is second in importance to smoking cessation treatment in the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Access to the service is limited and less than half of those referred complete the treatment. AIMS: We assessed the obstacles to participation in PR among COPD patients in a community-based PR programme and associated general practices. METHODS: A qualitative interview study was conducted among COPD patients who completed the PR treatment, those who did not complete or declined treatment, and patients never referred. Participants were invited by letter from their own general practitioners or from the PR service. Views on exercise, disease education, social contact, group activity, accessibility, location, role of referrer, and support for participation were assessed. Data were analysed using the framework approach. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients (28%, 13 male, 12 not referred) were interviewed. The acceptability of PR was the major concern. Feasibility of attending was an issue for some. Perceptions of PR and of exercise were highlighted. How a smoker might be seen, the suitability of group activity, and the views of professionals were influential, as were positive and negative recommendations. The location of the centre was important. Participants' willingness or reluctance to take on something new was a central element of the decision. Many would welcome the role of experienced patients in introducing the treatment. CONCLUSIONS: For patients who refused referral to PR, had not completed a course, or had yet to be referred, the way the service was introduced was an important determinant of willingness to participate.

Effectiveness, attendance, and completion of an integrated, system-wide pulmonary rehabilitation service for COPD: prospective observational study.

Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is one of the most effective treatments for COPD but not widely available. Uptake is poor and completion rates are low. In this integrated PR service we report on effectiveness, attendance, and completion of twice weekly rolling recruitment and once weekly cohort recruitment programmes in two hospital and five community PR sites. The hospital and two of the community programmes were 'rolling' recruitment twice weekly for 8 weeks. Three community programmes ran in once weekly cohorts for 8 weeks. Predictors of attendance, completion and effectiveness were sought. 1114 eligible COPD patients were referred. 812 (73%) attended assessment, 656 (59%) started and 441 (40%) completed. Significant improvements were seen in incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT) (mean 68.3 m; 95%CI 59.3-77.4), Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire self-report dyspnoea scale (CRQ-SR) (0.94; 0.80-1.07), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale anxiety (0.9; 0.5-1.2) and depression (1.1; 0.8-1.4) components, exceeding the minimum clinically important difference for ISWT and CRQ-SR. Twice weekly compared with once weekly programmes showed similar improvement. Patients were less likely to complete if they were deprived (4(th) quintile of deprivation 0.56; 0.33-0.94, 5(th) quintile 0.57; 0.34-0.85), reported MRC dyspnoea scale 4 (0.61; 0.37-0.97) or 5 (0.39; 0.16-0.93), or had been referred by their general practitioner (0.42; 0.24-0.74) (pseudo R(2) 0.103). PR is effective for COPD in real-world practice achieving results comparable to trials. Low rates of attendance and completion of PR were not explained by demographic characteristics, disease severity, psychological morbidity and source of referral despite the large number of participants.

People with COPD perceive ongoing, structured and socially supportive exercise opportunities to be important for maintaining an active lifestyle following pulmonary rehabilitation: a qualitative study.

QUESTION: What are the views and perceptions of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) regarding maintaining an active lifestyle following a course of pulmonary rehabilitation? DESIGN: Qualitative study of two focus groups using a grounded theory approach. PARTICIPANTS: Sixteen people with COPD who had completed a course of pulmonary rehabilitation. RESULTS: Data from focus groups concurred and five main themes emerged: value of pulmonary rehabilitation, ongoing exercise, professional support, peer social support, and health status. Pulmonary rehabilitation was seen as facilitating greater participation in everyday activity by improving physical ability and confidence to manage breathlessness, and reducing fear about exertional activity. An exercise routine following rehabilitation was perceived as essential for maintaining activity, with participants voicing a need for ongoing, structured and supervised sessions to maintain new found abilities. The exercise facility presented a possible barrier to attendance due to its potential to provoke feelings of embarrassment or intimidation. Professional and peer support were identified as key elements; participants expressed a desire to exercise within a peer group combined with an opportunity for social interaction. Health status relating to COPD symptoms was also identified as negatively impacting on physical activity participation. Confidence or self-efficacy for physical activity emerged as a prominent factor within main themes. CONCLUSION: The opportunity for structured, ongoing exercise with peer and professional support, in a suitable venue, is perceived as important to people with COPD in facilitating a physically active lifestyle following pulmonary rehabilitation. This desire for such opportunities may be related to individuals' self-efficacy towards physical activity.

The COPD assessment test (CAT): response to pulmonary rehabilitation. A multicentre, prospective study.

BACKGROUND: The COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) assessment test (CAT) is a recently introduced, simple to use patient-completed quality of life instrument that contains eight questions covering the impact of symptoms in COPD. It is not known how the CAT score performs in the context of clinical pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programmes or what the minimum clinically important difference is. METHODS: The introduction of the CAT score as an outcome measure was prospectively studied by PR programmes across London. It was used alongside other measures including the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire, the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire, the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression score, the Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnoea score and a range of different walking tests. Patients completed a 5-point anchor question used to assess overall response to PR from 'I feel much better' to 'I feel much worse'. RESULTS: Data were available for 261 patients with COPD participating in seven programmes: mean (SD) age 69.0 (9.0) years, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV(1)) 51.1 (18.7) % predicted, MRC score 3.2 (1.0). Mean change in CAT score after PR was 2.9 (5.6) points, improving by 3.8 (6.1) points in those scoring 'much better' (n=162), and by 1.3(4.5) in those who felt 'a little better' (n=88) (p=0.002). Only eight individuals reported no difference after PR and three reported feeling 'a little worse', so comparison with these smaller groups was not possible. CONCLUSION: The CAT score is simple to implement as an outcome measure, it improves in response to PR and can distinguish categories of response.