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.

Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibition as an Adjunct to Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

RATIONALE: Epidemiological studies in older individuals have found an association between the use of angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibition (ACE-I) therapy and preserved locomotor muscle mass, strength, and walking speed. ACE-I therapy might therefore have a role in the context of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). OBJECTIVES: To investigate the hypothesis that enalapril, an ACE inhibitor, would augment the improvement in exercise capacity seen during PR. METHODS: We performed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group randomized controlled trial. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, who had at least moderate airflow obstruction and were taking part in PR, were randomized to either 10 weeks of therapy with an ACE inhibitor (10 mg enalapril) or placebo. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measurement was the change in peak power (assessed using cycle ergometry) from baseline. Eighty patients were enrolled, 78 were randomized (age 67 ± 8 years; FEV1 48 ± 21% predicted), and 65 completed the trial (34 on placebo, 31 on the ACE inhibitor). The ACE inhibitor-treated group demonstrated a significant reduction in systolic blood pressure (Δ, -16 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI], -22 to -11) and serum ACE activity (Δ, -18 IU/L; 95% CI, -23 to -12) versus placebo (between-group differences, P < 0.0001). Peak power increased significantly more in the placebo group (placebo Δ, +9 W; 95% CI, 5 to 13 vs. ACE-I Δ, +1 W; 95% CI, -2 to 4; between-group difference, 8 W; 95% CI, 3 to 13; P = 0.001). There was no significant between-group difference in quadriceps strength or health-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the ACE inhibitor enalapril, together with a program of PR, in patients without an established indication for ACE-I, reduced the peak work rate response to exercise training in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.