Longer Versus Shorter Duration of Supervised Rehabilitation After Lung Transplantation: A Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of a supervised longer- (14wk) versus shorter-duration (7wk) rehabilitation program after lung transplantation (LTX). DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Outpatient rehabilitation gym setting. PARTICIPANTS: Post-LTX patients aged ≥18 years (N=66; 33 women; mean age, 51±13y) who had undergone either single LTX or bilateral LTX. INTERVENTION: Outpatient rehabilitation program consisting of thrice-weekly sessions with cardiovascular training on bike ergometer and treadmill plus upper and lower limb strength training. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measures were taken at baseline, 7 weeks, 14 weeks, and 6 months by assessors who were blinded to group allocation. Functional exercise capacity was measured by the 6-minute walk test (6MWT). Strength of quadriceps and hamstrings was measured on an isokinetic dynamometer and recorded as average peak torque of 6 repetitions for both muscles. Quality of life (QOL) was assessed with the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey. RESULTS: Of the participants, 86% had bilateral LTX and 41% had primary diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. The 6MWT increased in both groups with no significant difference between groups at any time point (mean 6mo 6MWD: short, 590±85m vs long, 568±127m; P=0.5). Similarly, at 6 months, there was no difference between groups in quadriceps average peak torque (mean, 115±38Nm vs 114±40Nm, respectively; P=.59), hamstring average peak torque (57±18Nm vs 52±19Nm, respectively; P=.36), or mental or physical health domains of quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Shorter duration (7wk) of rehabilitation achieves comparable outcomes with 14 weeks of supervised rehabilitation for functional exercise capacity, lower limb strength, and quality of life at 6 months after LTX.

Physiotherapy for cystic fibrosis in Australia and New Zealand: A clinical practice guideline.

Physiotherapy management is a key element of care for people with cystic fibrosis (CF) throughout the lifespan. Although considerable evidence exists to support physiotherapy management of CF, there is documented variation in practice. The aim of this guideline is to optimize the physiotherapy management of people with CF in Australia and New Zealand. A systematic review of the literature in key areas of physiotherapy practice for CF was undertaken. Recommendations were formulated based on National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia) guidelines and considered the quality, quantity and level of the evidence; the consistency of the body of evidence; the likely clinical impact; and applicability to physiotherapy practice in Australia and New Zealand. A total of 30 recommendations were made for airway clearance therapy, inhalation therapy, exercise assessment and training, musculoskeletal management, management of urinary incontinence, managing the newly diagnosed patient with CF, delivery of non-invasive ventilation, and physiotherapy management before and after lung transplantation. These recommendations can be used to underpin the provision of evidence-based physiotherapy care to people with CF in Australia and New Zealand.

The effect of positive expiratory pressure (PEP) therapy on symptoms, quality of life and incidence of re-exacerbation in patients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Positive expiratory pressure (PEP) is a technique used to enhance sputum clearance during acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). The impact of PEP therapy during acute exacerbations on clinically important outcomes is not clear. This study sought to determine the effect of PEP therapy on symptoms, quality of life and future exacerbations in patients with AECOPD. METHODS: 90 inpatients (58 men; mean age 68.6 years, FEV(1) 40.8% predicted) with AECOPD and sputum expectoration were randomised to receive usual care (including physical exercise)±PEP therapy. The Breathlessness, Cough and Sputum Scale (BCSS), St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and BODE index (Body mass index, airflow Obstruction, Dyspnoea, Exercise tolerance) were measured at discharge, 8 weeks and 6 months following discharge, and analysed via linear mixed models. Exacerbations and hospitalisations were recorded using home diaries. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences over time for BCSS score [mean (SE) at discharge 5.2 (0.4) vs 5.0 (0.4) for PEP and control group, respectively; p=0.978] or SGRQ total score [41.6 (2.6) vs 40.8 (2.8) at 8 weeks, p=0.872]. Dyspnoea improved more rapidly in the PEP group over the first 8 weeks (p=0.006), however these benefits were not observed at 6 months. Exacerbations (p=0.986) and hospitalisations (p=0.359) did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that PEP therapy during AECOPD improves important short-term or long-term outcomes. There does not appear to be a routine role for PEP therapy in the management of such individuals.