compared with SMT, NIV decreased the rate of meeting the ETI criteria and the mortality rate of very old patients with AHRF. NIV should be offered as an alternative to patients considered poor candidates for intubation and those with a DNI order.
Background: The optimal frequency of delivering a pulmonary rehabilitation program (PR) is not yet a well established issue. It is still unclear whether repeated PR at established intervals will result in effective maintenance or further improvement in the patient’s health status. Objectives: To investigate whether more frequently repeated PR in patients with COPD (1) leads to similar short and long-term physiological gains, and (2) decreases the burden due to hospitalization. Methods: Thirty-five disabled COPD patients (FEV1 below 50% predicted, MRC score 3) in a stable state were studied in a randomized controlled trial. After completing an initial inpatient PR program, they were randomly assigned to either group 1 (performing a second and a third PR after 6 and 12 months) or group 2 (performing only a second PR after 12 months). Results: Lung functions, exercise capacity (by means of a timed walk test – 6MWT), peak-effort dyspnea (D) and leg fatigue (F), and health-related quality of life by means of SGRQ were assessed prior to (T1, T3, T5) and after (T2, T4, T6) each PR program: the same measures were taken on an outpatient basis at T3 in group 2. The number of hospital admissions (HA) and days spent in the hospital (DH) were also recorded over the year. The two groups did not differ in any parameter at baseline. 6MWD, D, F and SGRQ improved to the same level (p = 0.05) after each PR in both groups. However, the baseline level of D, F and SGRQ symptoms and impact scores progressively improved over time in group 1 but not in group 2. After 12 months, a larger amount of patients in Group 1, as compared to Group 2, reported H10 DH/year (p < 0.0001). Conclusions: In severe and disabled COPD, a more frequently repeated inpatient PR may lead to some additional physiological and clinical benefits over 1 year.
Rehabilitation outcomes of difficult-to-wean tracheostomized patients have been reported in relatively small case studies and described for a limited time span. This study describes the characteristics and clinical outcomes of a large cohort of tracheostomized patients admitted to a specialized weaning unit over 10 years. We retrospectively analyzed data collected from January 2010 to December 2019 on difficult-to-wean tracheostomized patients who underwent comprehensive rehabilitation. Clinical characteristics collected at admission were the level of comorbidity (by the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale—CIRS) and the clinical severity (by the Simplified Acute Physiology Score—SAPS II). The proportions of patients weaned, decannulated, and able to walk; the change in autonomy level according to the Bristol Activities of Daily Living (BADL) Scale; and the setting of hospital discharge was assessed and compared in a consecutive 5-year time period (2010–2014 and 2015–2019) subgroup analysis. A total of 180 patients were included in the analysis. Patient anthropometry and preadmission clinical management in acute care hospitals were similar across years, but the categories of underlying diagnosis changed (p < 0.001) (e.g., chronic obstructive pulmonary disease—COPD—decreased), while the level of comorbidities increased (p = 0.003). The decannulation rate was 45.6%. CIRS and SAPS II at admission were both significant predictors of clinical outcomes. The proportion of patients whose gain in BADL score increased ≥ 2 points decreased over time. This study confirms the importance of rehabilitation in weaning units for the severely disabled subset of tracheostomized patients. Comorbidities and severity at admission are significantly associated with rehabilitation outcomes at discharge.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.