BackgroundPulmonary rehabilitation is a cornerstone of care for COPD but uptake of traditional centre-based programmes is poor. We assessed whether home-based pulmonary rehabilitation, delivered using minimal resources, had equivalent outcomes to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation.MethodsA randomised controlled equivalence trial with 12 months follow-up. Participants with stable COPD were randomly assigned to receive 8 weeks of pulmonary rehabilitation by either the standard outpatient centre-based model, or a new home-based model including one home visit and seven once-weekly telephone calls from a physiotherapist. The primary outcome was change in 6 min walk distance (6MWD).ResultsWe enrolled 166 participants to receive centre-based rehabilitation (n=86) or home-based rehabilitation (n=80). Intention-to-treat analysis confirmed non-inferiority of home-based rehabilitation for 6MWD at end-rehabilitation and the confidence interval (CI) did not rule out superiority (mean difference favouring home group 18.6 m, 95% CI −3.3 to 40.7). At 12 months the CI did not exclude inferiority (−5.1 m, −29.2 to 18.9). Between-group differences for dyspnoea-related quality of life did not rule out superiority of home-based rehabilitation at programme completion (1.6 points, −0.3 to 3.5) and groups were equivalent at 12 months (0.05 points, −2.0 to 2.1). The per-protocol analysis showed the same pattern of findings. Neither group maintained postrehabilitation gains at 12 months.ConclusionsThis home-based pulmonary rehabilitation model, delivered with minimal resources, produced short-term clinical outcomes that were equivalent to centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation. Neither model was effective in maintaining gains at 12 months. Home-based pulmonary rehabilitation could be considered for people with COPD who cannot access centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation.Trial registration numberNCT01423227, clinicaltrials.gov.

Background Uncertainty exists regarding the clinical relevance of exercise training across the range of interstitial lung diseases (ILDs). Objective To establish the impact of exercise training in patients with ILDs of differing aetiology and severity. Methods 142 participants with ILD (61 idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF), 22 asbestosis, 23 connective tissue disease-related ILD (CTD-ILD) and 36 with other aetiologies) were randomised to either 8 weeks of supervised exercise training or usual care. Six-minute walk distance (6MWD), Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRDQ), St George Respiratory Questionnaire IPF-specific version (SGRQ-I) and modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea score were measured at baseline, 9 weeks and 6 months. Measurements and main results Exercise training significantly increased 6MWD (25 m, 95% CI 2 to 47 m) and health-related quality of life (CRDQ and SGRQ

BackgroundExercise training is recommended for non-cystic fibrosis (CF) bronchiectasis, but the long-term effects are unclear. This randomised controlled trial aimed to determine the effects of exercise training and review of airway clearance therapy (ACT) on exercise capacity, health related quality of life (HRQOL) and the incidence of acute exacerbations in people with non-CF bronchiectasis.MethodsParticipants were randomly allocated to 8 weeks of supervised exercise training and review of ACT, or control. Primary outcomes of exercise capacity and HRQOL (Chronic respiratory disease questionnaire) and secondary outcomes of cough-related QOL (Leicester cough questionnaire) and psychological symptoms (Hospital anxiety and depression scale) were measured at baseline, following completion of the intervention period and at 6 and 12 months follow up. Secondary outcomes of the exacerbation rate and time to first exacerbation were analysed over 12 months.ResultsEighty-five participants (mean FEV1 74% predicted; median Modified Medical Research Council Dyspnoea grade of 1 (IQR [1–3]) were included. Exercise training increased the incremental shuttle walk distance (mean difference to control 62 m, 95% CI 24 to 101 m) and the 6-minute walking distance (mean difference to control 41 m, 95% CI 19 to 63 m), but these improvements were not sustained at 6 or 12 months. Exercise training reduced dyspnoea (p = 0.009) and fatigue (p = 0.01) but did not impact on cough-related QOL or mood. Exercise training reduced the frequency of acute exacerbations (median 1[IQR 1–3]) compared to the control group (2[1–3]) over 12 months follow up (p = 0.012), with a longer time to first exacerbation with exercise training of 8 months (95% CI 7 to 9 months) compared to the control group (6 months [95% CI 5 to 7 months], p = 0.047).ConclusionsExercise training in bronchiectasis is associated with short term improvement in exercise capacity, dyspnoea and fatigue and fewer exacerbations over 12 months.Trial registryClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00885521).

ACTRN12611000874910, results.

Analysis 2.1. Comparison 2 Stable bronchiectasis: chest physiotherapy ACT vs no ACT (control), Outcome 1 Change in HRQoL..... Analysis 2.2. Comparison 2 Stable bronchiectasis: chest physiotherapy ACT vs no ACT (control), Outcome 2 Change in FEV1....... Analysis 2.3. Comparison 2 Stable bronchiectasis: chest physiotherapy ACT vs no ACT (control), Outcome 3 Change in FVC........ Analysis 2.4. Comparison 2 Stable bronchiectasis: chest physiotherapy ACT vs no ACT (control), Outcome 4 Change in TLC........ Analysis 2.5. Comparison 2 Stable bronchiectasis: chest physiotherapy ACT vs no ACT (control), Outcome 5 Change in RV......... Analysis 2.6. Comparison 2 Stable bronchiectasis: chest physiotherapy ACT vs no ACT (control), Outcome 6 Change in PaO2....... Analysis 2.7. Comparison 2 Stable bronchiectasis: chest physiotherapy ACT vs no ACT (control), Outcome 7 Change in PaCO2..... Analysis 2.8. Comparison 2 Stable bronchiectasis: chest physiotherapy ACT vs no ACT (control), Outcome 8 Change in breathlessness, cough and sputum.

Interventions for promoting physical activity in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Objectives: To identify exercise tests that are suitable for home-based or remote administration in people with chronic lung disease. Methods: Rapid review of studies that reported home-based or remote administration of an exercise test in people with chronic lung disease, and studies reporting their clinimetric (measurement) properties. Results: 84 studies were included. Tests used at home were the 6-minute walk test (6MWT, two studies), sit-to-stand tests (STS, five studies), Timed Up and Go (TUG, 4 studies) and step tests (two studies). Exercise tests administered remotely were the 6MWT (two studies) and step test (one study). Compared to centre-based testing the 6MWT distance was similar when performed outdoors but shorter when performed at home (two studies). The STS, TUG and step tests were feasible, reliable (intra-class correlation coefficients >0.80), valid (concurrent and known groups validity) and moderately responsive to pulmonary rehabilitation (medium effect sizes). These tests elicited less desaturation than the 6MWT, and validated methods to prescribe exercise were not reported. Discussion: The STS, step and TUG tests can be performed at home, but do not accurately document desaturation with walking or allow exercise prescription. Patients at risk of desaturation should be prioritised for centre-based exercise testing when this is available.

No abstract