The considerable growth in the science and application of pulmonary rehabilitation since 2006 adds further support for its efficacy in a wide range of individuals with chronic respiratory disease.

Field walking tests are commonly employed to evaluate exercise capacity, assess prognosis and evaluate treatment response in chronic respiratory diseases. In recent years, there has been a wealth of new literature pertinent to the conduct of the 6-min walk test (6MWT), and a growing evidence base describing the incremental and endurance shuttle walk tests (ISWT and ESWT, respectively). The aim of this document is to describe the standard operating procedures for the 6MWT, ISWT and ESWT, which can be consistently employed by clinicians and researchers.The Technical Standard was developed by a multidisciplinary and international group of clinicians and researchers with expertise in the application of field walking tests. The procedures are underpinned by a concurrent systematic review of literature relevant to measurement properties and test conduct in adults with chronic respiratory disease.Current data confirm that the 6MWT, ISWT and ESWT are valid, reliable and responsive to change with some interventions. However, results are sensitive to small changes in methodology. It is important that two tests are conducted for the 6MWT and ISWT.This Technical Standard for field walking tests reflects current evidence regarding procedures that should be used to achieve robust results. OverviewThe aim of this Technical Standard is to document the standard operating procedures for the 6-min walk test (6MWT), incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT) and endurance shuttle walk test (ESWT) in adults with chronic respiratory disease. The testing procedures were developed by a multinational and multidisciplinary group of experts in field exercise testing, informed by a systematic review of the measurement properties and interpretation of the 6MWT, ISWT and ESWT in adults with chronic respiratory disease [1].The key findings of the Technical Standard are as follows.1) The 6-min walking distance (6MWD), ISWT and ESWT demonstrate good construct validity. Strong relationships with measures of exercise performance and physical activity support their conceptualisation as tests of functional exercise performance.2) A lower 6MWD is strongly associated with increased risk of hospitalisation and mortality in people with chronic respiratory disease, with a small number of studies suggesting a similar relationship for the ISWT.3) The 6MWD, ISWT and ESWT exhibit good test-retest reliability; however, there is strong evidence of a learning effect for the 6MWT and ISWT. Two tests should be performed when the 6MWT or ISWT are used to measure change over time.4) The 6MWD, ISWT and ESWT are responsive to treatment effects in people with chronic respiratory disease; however, most studies have evaluated responsiveness to rehabilitation and fewer data are available to confirm responsiveness to other interventions.5) The 6MWD and ISWT elicit a peak oxygen uptake (V9O 2 peak) that is similar to that during a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET). As a result, the contraindications and precautions for field testing should be consistent with those ...

This systematic review examined the measurement properties of the 6-min walk test (6MWT), incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT) and endurance shuttle walk test (ESWT) in adults with chronic respiratory disease.Studies that report the evaluation or use of the 6MWT, ISWT or ESWT were included. We searched electronic databases for studies published between January 2000 and September 2013.The 6-min walking distance (6MWD) is a reliable measure (intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.82 to 0.99 in seven studies). There is a learning effect, with greater distance walked on the second test (pooled mean improvement of 26 m in 13 studies). Reliability was similar for ISWT and ESWT, with a learning effect also evident for ISWT (pooled mean improvement of 20 m in six studies). The 6MWD correlates more strongly with peak work capacity (r50.59-0.93) and physical activity (r50.40-0.85) than with respiratory function (r50.10-0.59). Methodological factors affecting 6MWD include track length, encouragement, supplemental oxygen and walking aids. Supplemental oxygen also affects ISWT and ESWT performance. Responsiveness was moderate to high for all tests, with greater responsiveness to interventions that included exercise training.The findings of this review demonstrate that the 6MWT, ISWT and ESWT are robust tests of functional exercise capacity in adults with chronic respiratory disease. OverviewThe aim of this systematic review was to examine the measurement properties for the 6-min walk test (6MWT), incremental shuttle walk test (ISWT) and endurance shuttle walk test (ESWT) in adults with chronic respiratory disease. A companion paper describes the standard operating procedures for the tests [1]. The key findings of this systematic review are as follows.1) The 6-min walking distance (6MWD) is a valid and reliable measure of exercise capacity for people with chronic lung disease. The 6MWD correlates more strongly with measures of peak work capacity and physical activity than with respiratory function or quality of life, which supports its conceptualisation as a test of functional exercise performance.2) The ISWT offers a different protocol to the 6MWT as it is incremental and externally paced. The ISWT is a valid and reliable measure of cardiopulmonary exercise capacity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), where there is a strong relationship between ISWT distance and peak oxygen uptake (V9O 2 peak) or work rate on a cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET).3) A learning effect is observed for the 6MWT and the ISWT. The second test usually is the better compared with the first, but this is inconsistent.4) The ESWT is a test of endurance capacity. It is externally paced and is performed along the same course as the ISWT. Two tests do not appear to be necessary if the second test is conducted on the same day.5) Reference equations have been proposed for the 6MWD and the ISWT. Age, height and weight are included in most equations. The influence of race and ethnicity is unclear.6) The safety profile of ...

The ATS and ERS commit to undertake actions that will improve access to and delivery of PR services for suitable patients. They call on their members and other health professional societies, payers, patients, and patient advocacy groups to join in this commitment.

Pulmonary rehabilitation is an essential component of care for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and is supported by strong scientific evidence. Despite this, many people with COPD do not complete their program or choose not to attend at all. The aim of this study was to determine the factors associated with uptake and completion of pulmonary rehabilitation for people with COPD. Seven electronic databases were searched for qualitative or quantitative studies that documented factors associated with uptake and completion of pulmonary rehabilitation in people with COPD. Two reviewers independently extracted data, which was synthesized to provide overall themes. Travel and transport were consistently identified as barriers to both uptake and completion. A lack of perceived benefit of pulmonary rehabilitation also influenced both uptake and completion. The only demographic features that consistently predicted non-completion were being a current smoker (pooled odds ratio 0.17, 95% confidence interval 0.10 to 0.32) and depression. The limited data available regarding barriers to uptake indicated that disruption to usual routine, influence of the referring doctor and program timing were important. In conclusion poor access to transport and lack of perceived benefit affect uptake of pulmonary rehabilitation. Current smokers and patients who are depressed are at increased risk of non-completion. Enhancing attendance in pulmonary rehabilitation will require more attention to transportation, support for those at risk of non-completion and greater involvement of patients in informed decisions about their care.

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.

CRD42015029836.

BackgroundPatients with COVID-19 or post-COVID-19 will most probably have a need for rehabilitation during and directly after the hospitalisation. Data on safety and efficacy are lacking. Healthcare professionals cannot wait for published randomised controlled trials before they can start these rehabilitative interventions in daily clinical practice, as the number of post-COVID-19 patients increases rapidly. The Convergence of Opinion on Recommendations and Evidence process was used to make interim recommendation for the rehabilitation in the hospital and post-hospital phase in COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 patients, respectively.Methods93 experts were asked to fill out 13 multiple choice questions. Agreement of directionality was tabulated for each question. At least 70% agreement on directionality was necessary to make consensus suggestions.Results76 experts (82%) reached consensus on all questions based upon indirect evidence and clinical experience on the need for early rehabilitation during the hospital admission, the screening for treatable traits with rehabilitation in all patients at discharge and 6–8 weeks after discharge, and around the content of rehabilitation for these patients. It advocates for assessment of oxygen needs at discharge and more comprehensive assessment of rehabilitation needs including physical as well as mental aspects 6–8 weeks after discharge. Based on the deficits identified multidisciplinary rehabilitation should be offered with attention for skeletal muscle and functional as well as mental restoration.ConclusionsThis multinational task force recommends early, bedside rehabilitation for patients affected by severe COVID-19. The model of pulmonary rehabilitation may suit as a framework, particularly in a subset of patients with long term respiratory consequences.