-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jul 2017Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) with bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPAP) is commonly used to treat patients admitted to hospital with acute hypercapnic respiratory... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Non-invasive ventilation (NIV) with bi-level positive airway pressure (BiPAP) is commonly used to treat patients admitted to hospital with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure (AHRF) secondary to an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD).
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy of NIV applied in conjunction with usual care versus usual care involving no mechanical ventilation alone in adults with AHRF due to AECOPD. The aim of this review is to update the evidence base with the goals of supporting clinical practice and providing recommendations for future evaluation and research.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified trials from the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials (CAGR), which is derived from systematic searches of bibliographic databases including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), and PsycINFO, and through handsearching of respiratory journals and meeting abstracts. This update to the original review incorporates the results of database searches up to January 2017.
SELECTION CRITERIA
All randomised controlled trials that compared usual care plus NIV (BiPAP) versus usual care alone in an acute hospital setting for patients with AECOPD due to AHRF were eligible for inclusion. AHRF was defined by a mean admission pH < 7.35 and mean partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO) > 45 mmHg (6 kPa). Primary review outcomes were mortality during hospital admission and need for endotracheal intubation. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, treatment intolerance, complications, changes in symptoms, and changes in arterial blood gases.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently applied the selection criteria to determine study eligibility, performed data extraction, and determined risk of bias in accordance with Cochrane guidelines. Review authors undertook meta-analysis for data that were both clinically and statistically homogenous, and analysed data as both one overall pooled sample and according to two predefined subgroups related to exacerbation severity (admission pH between 7.35 and 7.30 vs below 7.30) and NIV treatment setting (intensive care unit-based vs ward-based). We reported results for mortality, need for endotracheal intubation, and hospital length of stay in a 'Summary of findings' table and rated their quality in accordance with GRADE criteria.
MAIN RESULTS
We included in the review 17 randomised controlled trials involving 1264 participants. Available data indicate that mean age at recruitment was 66.8 years (range 57.7 to 70.5 years) and that most participants (65%) were male. Most studies (12/17) were at risk of performance bias, and for most (14/17), the risk of detection bias was uncertain. These risks may have affected subjective patient-reported outcome measures (e.g. dyspnoea) and secondary review outcomes, respectively.Use of NIV decreased the risk of mortality by 46% (risk ratio (RR) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 0.76; N = 12 studies; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 12, 95% CI 9 to 23) and decreased the risk of needing endotracheal intubation by 65% (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.46; N = 17 studies; NNTB 5, 95% CI 5 to 6). We graded both outcomes as 'moderate' quality owing to uncertainty regarding risk of bias for several studies. Inspection of the funnel plot related to need for endotracheal intubation raised the possibility of some publication bias pertaining to this outcome. NIV use was also associated with reduced length of hospital stay (mean difference (MD) -3.39 days, 95% CI -5.93 to -0.85; N = 10 studies), reduced incidence of complications (unrelated to NIV) (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.53; N = 2 studies), and improvement in pH (MD 0.05, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.07; N = 8 studies) and in partial pressure of oxygen (PaO) (MD 7.47 mmHg, 95% CI 0.78 to 14.16 mmHg; N = 8 studies) at one hour. A trend towards improvement in PaCO was observed, but this finding was not statistically significant (MD -4.62 mmHg, 95% CI -11.05 to 1.80 mmHg; N = 8 studies). Post hoc analysis revealed that this lack of benefit was due to the fact that data from two studies at high risk of bias showed baseline imbalance for this outcome (worse in the NIV group than in the usual care group). Sensitivity analysis revealed that exclusion of these two studies resulted in a statistically significant positive effect of NIV on PaCO. Treatment intolerance was significantly greater in the NIV group than in the usual care group (risk difference (RD) 0.11, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.17; N = 6 studies). Results of analysis showed a non-significant trend towards reduction in dyspnoea with NIV compared with usual care (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.16, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.02; N = 4 studies). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant between-group differences.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Data from good quality randomised controlled trials show that NIV is beneficial as a first-line intervention in conjunction with usual care for reducing the likelihood of mortality and endotracheal intubation in patients admitted with acute hypercapnic respiratory failure secondary to an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The magnitude of benefit for these outcomes appears similar for patients with acidosis of a mild (pH 7.30 to 7.35) versus a more severe nature (pH < 7.30), and when NIV is applied within the intensive care unit (ICU) or ward setting.
Topics: Adult; Disease Progression; Humans; Noninvasive Ventilation; Positive-Pressure Respiration; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Insufficiency
PubMed: 28702957
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004104.pub4 -
JAMA Aug 2017Pneumonia is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in children. It is important to identify the clinical symptoms and physical examination findings associated with... (Review)
Review
IMPORTANCE
Pneumonia is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in children. It is important to identify the clinical symptoms and physical examination findings associated with pneumonia to improve timely diagnosis, prevent significant morbidity, and limit antibiotic overuse.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review the accuracy of symptoms and physical examination findings in identifying children with radiographic pneumonia.
DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION
MEDLINE and Embase (1956 to May 2017) were searched, along with reference lists from retrieved articles, to identify diagnostic studies of pediatric pneumonia across a broad age range that had to include children younger than age 5 years (although some studies enrolled children up to age 19 years); 3644 unique articles were identified, of which 23 met inclusion criteria.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Two authors independently abstracted raw data and assessed methodological quality. A third author resolved disputes.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Likelihood ratios (LRs), sensitivity, and specificity were calculated for individual symptoms and physical examination findings for the diagnosis of pneumonia. An infiltrate on chest radiograph was considered the reference standard for the diagnosis of pneumonia.
RESULTS
Twenty-three prospective cohort studies of children (N = 13 833) with possible pneumonia were included (8 from North America), with a range of 78 to 2829 patients per study. The prevalence of radiographic pneumonia in North American studies was 19% (95% CI, 11%-31%) and 37% (95% CI, 26%-50%) outside of North America. No single symptom was strongly associated with pneumonia; however, the presence of chest pain in 2 studies that included adolescents was associated with pneumonia (LR, 1.5-5.5; sensitivity, 8%-14%; specificity, 94%-97%). Vital sign abnormalities such as fever (temperature >37.5°C [LR range, 1.7-1.8]; sensitivity, 80%-92%; specificity, 47%-54%) and tachypnea (respiratory rate >40 breaths/min; LR, 1.5 [95% CI, 1.3-1.7]; sensitivity, 79%; specificity, 51%) were not strongly associated with pneumonia diagnosis. Similarly, auscultatory findings were not associated with pneumonia diagnosis. The presence of moderate hypoxemia (oxygen saturation ≤96%; LR, 2.8 [95% CI, 2.1-3.6]; sensitivity, 64%; specificity, 77%) and increased work of breathing (grunting, flaring, and retractions; positive LR, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.6-2.7]) were signs most associated with pneumonia. The presence of normal oxygenation (oxygen saturation >96%) decreased the likelihood of pneumonia (LR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.32-0.67]).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Although no single finding reliably differentiates pneumonia from other causes of childhood respiratory illness, hypoxia and increased work of breathing are more important than tachypnea and auscultatory findings.
Topics: Adolescent; Chest Pain; Child; Child, Preschool; Cough; Diagnosis, Differential; Dyspnea; Female; Fever; Humans; Hypoxia; Lung; Male; Pneumonia; Radiography; Symptom Assessment; Vital Signs
PubMed: 28763554
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2017.9039 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Dec 2020This systematic review aimed to systematise the different designs used to deliver pulmonary rehabilitation during acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) and explore which... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This systematic review aimed to systematise the different designs used to deliver pulmonary rehabilitation during acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) and explore which ones are the most effective. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO and Cochrane were searched. Randomised controlled trials comparing pulmonary rehabilitation or at least one of its components with usual care or comparing different components of pulmonary rehabilitation were included. Network meta-analysis was conducted in MetaXL 5.3 using a generalised pairwise modelling framework. Pooled effects compared each treatment to usual care. 42 studies were included. Most studies were conducted in an inpatient setting (57%) and started the intervention 24-48 h after hospital admission (24%). Exercise training (71%), education and psychosocial support (57%) and breathing techniques (55%) were the most used components. Studies combining exercise with breathing techniques presented the larger effects on exercise capacity (weighted mean difference (WMD) -41.06, 95% CI -131.70-49.58) and health-related quality of life (WMD 16.07, 95% CI 10.29-21.84), and breathing techniques presented the larger effects on dyspnoea (WMD 1.90, 95% CI 0.53-3.27) and length of hospitalisation (effect size =0.15, 95% CI -0.28-0.57). A few minor adverse events were found.Pulmonary rehabilitation is a safe intervention during AECOPD. Exercise, breathing techniques, and education and psychosocial support seem to be the core components for implementing pulmonary rehabilitation during AECOPD. Studies may now focus on comparisons of optimal timings to start the intervention, total duration of the intervention, duration and frequency of sessions, and intensity for exercise prescription.
Topics: Dyspnea; Exercise Tolerance; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life
PubMed: 33208486
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0039-2020 -
Annals of Medicine Dec 2022The present systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) aimed to investigate the effects of pulmonary rehabilitation in individuals with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
The present systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) aimed to investigate the effects of pulmonary rehabilitation in individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
METHODS
The RCTs of pulmonary rehabilitation programs published between 1999 and 2021 were retrieved from electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase). Two reviewers independently assessed the topical relevance and trial quality and extracted data for meta-analysis using the Stata software version 14.0.
RESULTS
A total of 39 trials involving 2,397 participants with COPD were evaluated. We found that patients who received pulmonary rehabilitation program had significant improvement in the 6-min walk test (6MWT), St. George Respiratory Questionnaire score, and the modified British Medical Research Council score as compared to those who received usual care. Yoga and Tai Chi showed significant improvement in the forced expiratory volume (FEV1)% in 1 s predicted value. However, no significant difference was detected in the modified Borg score, forced vital capacity (FVC), and FEV1/FVC predicted value between the pulmonary rehabilitation and usual care groups.
CONCLUSION
Yoga and Tai Chi showed a significant improvement in the FEV1% predicted value. Also, pulmonary rehabilitation program improved the exercise capacity, the quality of life, and dyspnoea in patients with COPD.Key messagesA total of 39 trials involving 2,397 participants with COPD were evaluated.We found that patients who received pulmonary rehabilitation program had significant improvement in the 6MWT, St. George Respiratory Questionnaire score, and the modified British Medical Research Council score as compared to those who received usual care.Yoga and Tai Chi showed significant improvement in the FEV1% predicted value.No significant difference was detected in the modified Borg score, FVC, and FEV1/FVC predicted value between the pulmonary rehabilitation and usual care groups.
Topics: Dyspnea; Exercise Tolerance; Humans; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Function Tests
PubMed: 35037535
DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2021.1999494 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2021Chronic non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is increasingly being used to treat people with COPD who have respiratory failure, but the evidence supporting this treatment has... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Chronic non-invasive ventilation (NIV) is increasingly being used to treat people with COPD who have respiratory failure, but the evidence supporting this treatment has been conflicting.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of chronic non-invasive ventilation at home via a facial mask in people with COPD, using a pooled analysis of IPD and meta-analysis.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Register of Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, AMED, proceedings of respiratory conferences, clinical trial registries and bibliographies of relevant studies. We conducted the latest search on 21 December 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing chronic NIV for at least five hours per night for three consecutive weeks or more (in addition to standard care) versus standard care alone, in people with COPD. Studies investigating people initiated on NIV in a stable phase and studies investigating NIV commenced after a severe COPD exacerbation were eligible, but we reported and analysed them separately. The primary outcomes were arterial blood gases, health-related quality of life (HRQL), exercise capacity (stable COPD) and admission-free survival (post-exacerbation COPD). Secondary outcomes for both populations were: lung function, COPD exacerbations and admissions, and all-cause mortality. For stable COPD, we also reported respiratory muscle strength, dyspnoea and sleep efficiency.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. After inclusion of a study, we requested the IPD. We analysed continuous and time-to-event data using linear- and cox-regression mixed-effect models with a random effect on study level. We analysed dichotomous IPD using generalised estimating equations. We adjusted all models for age and sex. We assessed changes in outcomes after three and 12 months. We also conducted a meta-analysis on aggregated trial data.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 14 new RCTs in this review update, in addition to the seven previously included. Seventeen studies investigated chronic NIV in stable COPD and four studies investigated chronic NIV commenced after a severe COPD exacerbation. Three studies compared NIV to sham continuous positive airway pressure (2 to 4 cmHO). Seven studies used a nasal mask, one study used an oronasal mask and eight studies used both interfaces. Five studies did not report the interface. The majority of trials (20/21) were at high risk of performance bias due to an unblinded design. We considered 11 studies to have a low risk of selection bias and 13 to have a low risk of attrition bias. We collected and analysed the IPD from 13 stable COPD studies (n = 778, 68% of the participants included) and from three post-exacerbation studies (n = 364, 96% of the participants included). In the stable COPD group, NIV probably results in a minor benefit on the arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO) after three months (adjusted mean difference (AMD) 0.27 kPa, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.49; 9 studies, 271 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), but there was little to no benefit at 12 months (AMD 0.09 kPa, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.42; 3 studies, 171 participants; low-certainty evidence). The arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO) was reduced in participants allocated to NIV after three months (AMD -0.61 kPa, 95% CI -0.77 to -0.45; 11 studies, 475 participants; high-certainty evidence) and persisted up to 12 months (AMD -0.42 kPa, 95% CI -0.68 to -0.16; 4 studies, 232 participants; high-certainty evidence). Exercise capacity was measured with the 6-minute walking distance (minimal clinical important difference: 26 m). There was no clinically relevant effect of NIV on exercise capacity (3 months: AMD 15.5 m, 95% CI -0.8 to 31.7; 8 studies, 330 participants; low-certainty evidence; 12 months: AMD 26.4 m, 95% CI -7.6 to 60.5; 3 studies, 134 participants; very low-certainty evidence). HRQL was measured with the Severe Respiratory Insufficiency and the St. Georges's Respiratory Questionnaire and may be improved by NIV, but only after three months (3 months: standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.39, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.62; 5 studies, 259 participants; very low-certainty evidence; 12 months: SMD 0.15, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.43; 4 studies, 200 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Lastly, the risk for all-cause mortality is likely reduced by NIV (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 0.75, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.97; 3 studies, 405 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In the post-exacerbation COPD group, there was little to no benefit on the PaO after three months, but there may be a slight decrease after 12 months (3 months: AMD -0.10 kPa, 95% CI -0.65 to 0.45; 3 studies, 234 participants; low-certainty evidence; 12 months: -0.27 kPa, 95% CI -0.86 to 0.32, 3 studies; 170 participants; low-certainty evidence). The PaCO was reduced by NIV at both three months (AMD -0.40 kPa, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.09; 3 studies, 241 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) and 12 months (AMD -0.52 kPa, 95% CI -0.87 to -0.18; 3 studies, 175 participants; high-certainty evidence). NIV may have little to no benefit on HRQL (3 months: SMD 0.25, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.51; 2 studies, 219 participants; very low-certainty evidence; 12 months: SMD 0.25, 95% -0.06 to 0.55; 2 studies, 164 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Admission-free survival seems improved with NIV (AHR 0.71, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.94; 2 studies, 317 participants; low-certainty evidence), but the risk for all-cause mortality does not seem to improve (AHR 0.97, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.28; 2 studies, 317 participants; low-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Regardless of the timing of initiation, chronic NIV improves daytime hypercapnia. In addition, in stable COPD, survival seems to be improved and there might be a short term HRQL benefit. In people with persistent hypercapnia after a COPD exacerbation, chronic NIV might prolong admission-free survival without a beneficial effect on HRQL. In stable COPD, future RCTs comparing NIV to a control group receiving standard care might no longer be warranted, but research should focus on identifying participant characteristics that would define treatment success. Furthermore, the optimal timing for initiation of NIV after a severe COPD exacerbation is still unknown.
Topics: Disease Progression; Dyspnea; Humans; Noninvasive Ventilation; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life; Respiratory Insufficiency
PubMed: 34368950
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002878.pub3 -
Integrated disease management interventions for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2021People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) show considerable variation in symptoms, limitations, and well-being; this often complicates medical care. A... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) show considerable variation in symptoms, limitations, and well-being; this often complicates medical care. A multi-disciplinary and multi-component programme that addresses different elements of care could improve quality of life (QoL) and exercise tolerance, while reducing the number of exacerbations.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effectiveness of integrated disease management (IDM) programmes versus usual care for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in terms of health-related quality of life (QoL), exercise tolerance, and exacerbation-related outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL for potentially eligible studies. Searches were current as of September 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared IDM programmes for COPD versus usual care were included. Interventions consisted of multi-disciplinary (two or more healthcare providers) and multi-treatment (two or more components) IDM programmes of at least three months' duration.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. If required, we contacted study authors to request additional data. We performed meta-analyses using random-effects modelling. We carried out sensitivity analyses for the quality of included studies and performed subgroup analyses based on setting, study design, dominant intervention components, and region.
MAIN RESULTS
Along with 26 studies included in the 2013 Cochrane Review, we added 26 studies for this update, resulting in 52 studies involving 21,086 participants for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Follow-up periods ranged between 3 and 48 months and were classified as short-term (up to 6 months), medium-term (6 to 15 months), and long-term (longer than 15 months) follow-up. Studies were conducted in 19 different countries. The mean age of included participants was 67 years, and 66% were male. Participants were treated in all types of healthcare settings, including primary (n =15), secondary (n = 22), and tertiary care (n = 5), and combined primary and secondary care (n = 10). Overall, the level of certainty of evidence was moderate to high. We found that IDM probably improves health-related QoL as measured by St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score at medium-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) -3.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) -6.16 to -1.63; 18 RCTs, 4321 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). A comparable effect was observed at short-term follow-up (MD -3.78, 95% CI -6.29 to -1.28; 16 RCTs, 1788 participants). However, the common effect did not exceed the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of 4 points. There was no significant difference between IDM and control for long-term follow-up and for generic QoL. IDM probably also leads to a large improvement in maximum and functional exercise capacity, as measured by six-minute walking distance (6MWD), at medium-term follow-up (MD 44.69, 95% CI 24.01 to 65.37; 13 studies, 2071 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The effect exceeded the MCID of 35 metres and was even greater at short-term (MD 52.26, 95% CI 32.39 to 72.74; 17 RCTs, 1390 participants) and long-term (MD 48.83, 95% CI 16.37 to 80.49; 6 RCTs, 7288 participants) follow-up. The number of participants with respiratory-related admissions was reduced from 324 per 1000 participants in the control group to 235 per 1000 participants in the IDM group (odds ratio (OR) 0.64, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.81; 15 RCTs, median follow-up 12 months, 4207 participants; high-certainty evidence). Likewise, IDM probably results in a reduction in emergency department (ED) visits (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.50 to 0.93; 9 RCTs, median follow-up 12 months, 8791 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), a slight reduction in all-cause hospital admissions (OR 0.75, 95%CI 0.57 to 0.98; 10 RCTs, median follow-up 12 months, 9030 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and fewer hospital days per person admitted (MD -2.27, 95% CI -3.98 to -0.56; 14 RCTs, median follow-up 12 months, 3563 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Statistically significant improvement was noted on the Medical Research Council (MRC) Dyspnoea Scale at short- and medium-term follow-up but not at long-term follow-up. No differences between groups were reported for mortality, courses of antibiotics/prednisolone, dyspnoea, and depression and anxiety scores. Subgroup analysis of dominant intervention components and regions of study suggested context- and intervention-specific effects. However, some subgroup analyses were marked by considerable heterogeneity or included few studies. These results should therefore be interpreted with caution.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This review shows that IDM probably results in improvement in disease-specific QoL, exercise capacity, hospital admissions, and hospital days per person. Future research should evaluate which combination of IDM components and which intervention duration are most effective for IDM programmes, and should consider contextual determinants of implementation and treatment effect, including process-related outcomes, long-term follow-up, and cost-effectiveness analyses.
Topics: Aged; Disease Management; Dyspnea; Exercise Tolerance; Humans; Male; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life
PubMed: 34495549
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009437.pub3 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2022Asthma is a respiratory disease characterised by variable airflow limitation and the presence of respiratory symptoms including wheeze, chest tightness, cough and/or... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Asthma is a respiratory disease characterised by variable airflow limitation and the presence of respiratory symptoms including wheeze, chest tightness, cough and/or dyspnoea. Exercise training is beneficial for people with asthma; however, the response to conventional models of pulmonary rehabilitation is less clear.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate, in adults with asthma, the effectiveness of pulmonary rehabilitation compared to usual care on exercise performance, asthma control, and quality of life (co-primary outcomes), incidence of severe asthma exacerbations/hospitalisations, mental health, muscle strength, physical activity levels, inflammatory biomarkers, and adverse events.
SEARCH METHODS
We identified studies from the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, from their inception to May 2021, as well as the reference lists of all primary studies and review articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials in which pulmonary rehabilitation was compared to usual care in adults with asthma. Pulmonary rehabilitation must have included a minimum of four weeks (or eight sessions) aerobic training and education or self-management. Co-interventions were permitted; however, exercise training alone was not. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Following the use of Cochrane's Screen4Me workflow, two review authors independently screened and selected trials for inclusion, extracted study characteristics and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. We contacted study authors to retrieve missing data. We calculated between-group effects via mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD) using a random-effects model. We evaluated the certainty of evidence using GRADE methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 studies involving 894 participants (range 24 to 412 participants (n = 2 studies involving n > 100, one contributing to meta-analysis), mean age range 27 to 54 years). We identified one ongoing study and three studies awaiting classification. One study was synthesised narratively, and another involved participants specifically with asthma-COPD overlap. Most programmes were outpatient-based, lasting from three to four weeks (inpatient) or eight to 12 weeks (outpatient). Education or self-management components included breathing retraining and relaxation, nutritional advice and psychological counselling. One programme was specifically tailored for people with severe asthma. Pulmonary rehabilitation compared to usual care may increase maximal oxygen uptake (VO max) after programme completion, but the evidence is very uncertain for data derived using mL/kg/min (MD between groups of 3.63 mL/kg/min, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.48 to 5.77; 3 studies; n = 129) and uncertain for data derived from % predicted VO max (MD 14.88%, 95% CI 9.66 to 20.1%; 2 studies; n = 60). The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of pulmonary rehabilitation compared to usual care on incremental shuttle walk test distance (MD between groups 74.0 metres, 95% CI 26.4 to 121.4; 1 study; n = 30). Pulmonary rehabilitation may have little to no effect on VOmax at longer-term follow up (9 to 12 months), but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -0.69 mL/kg/min, 95% CI -4.79 to 3.42; I = 49%; 3 studies; n = 66). Pulmonary rehabilitation likely improves functional exercise capacity as measured by 6-minute walk distance, with MD between groups after programme completion of 79.8 metres (95% CI 66.5 to 93.1; 5 studies; n = 529; moderate certainty evidence). This magnitude of mean change exceeds the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) threshold for people with chronic respiratory disease. The evidence is very uncertain about the longer-term effects one year after pulmonary rehabilitation for this outcome (MD 52.29 metres, 95% CI 0.7 to 103.88; 2 studies; n = 42). Pulmonary rehabilitation may result in a small improvement in asthma control compared to usual care as measured by Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ), with an MD between groups of -0.46 (95% CI -0.76 to -0.17; 2 studies; n = 93; low certainty evidence); however, data derived from the Asthma Control Test were very uncertain (MD between groups 3.34, 95% CI -2.32 to 9.01; 2 studies; n = 442). The ACQ finding approximates the MCID of 0.5 points. Pulmonary rehabilitation results in little to no difference in asthma control as measured by ACQ at nine to 12 months follow-up (MD 0.09, 95% CI -0.35 to 0.53; 2 studies; n = 48; low certainty evidence). Pulmonary rehabilitation likely results in a large improvement in quality of life as assessed by the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score (MD -18.51, 95% CI -20.77 to -16.25; 2 studies; n = 440; moderate certainty evidence), with this magnitude of change exceeding the MCID. However, pulmonary rehabilitation may have little to no effect on Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire (AQLQ) total scores, with the evidence being very uncertain (MD 0.87, 95% CI -0.13 to 1.86; 2 studies; n = 442). Longer-term follow-up data suggested improvements in quality of life may occur as measured by SGRQ (MD -13.4, 95% CI -15.93 to -10.88; 2 studies; n = 430) but not AQLQ (MD 0.58, 95% CI -0.23 to 1.38; 2 studies; n = 435); however, the evidence is very uncertain. One study reported no difference between groups in the proportion of participants who experienced an asthma exacerbation during the intervention period. Data from one study suggest adverse events attributable to the intervention are rare. Overall risk of bias was most commonly impacted by performance bias attributed to a lack of participant blinding to knowledge of the intervention. This is inherently challenging to overcome in rehabilitation studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Moderate certainty evidence shows that pulmonary rehabilitation is probably associated with clinically meaningful improvements in functional exercise capacity and quality of life upon programme completion in adults with asthma. The certainty of evidence relating to maximal exercise capacity was very low to low. Pulmonary rehabilitation appears to confer minimal effect on asthma control, although the certainty of evidence is very low to low. Unclear reporting of study methods and small sample sizes limits our certainty in the overall body of evidence, whilst heterogenous study designs and interventions likely contribute to inconsistent findings across clinical outcomes and studies. There remains considerable scope for future research.
Topics: Adult; Asthma; Dyspnea; Hospitalization; Humans; Middle Aged; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35993916
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013485.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2019Patients with advanced lung cancer have a high symptom burden, which is often complicated by coexisting conditions. These issues, combined with the indirect effects of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Patients with advanced lung cancer have a high symptom burden, which is often complicated by coexisting conditions. These issues, combined with the indirect effects of cancer treatment, can cumulatively lead patients to continued deconditioning and low exercise capacity. This is a concern as exercise capacity is considered a measure of whole body health, and is critical in a patient's ability to participate in life activities and tolerate difficult treatments. There is evidence that exercise training improves exercise capacity and other outcomes, such as muscle force and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), in cancer survivors. However, the effectiveness of exercise training on these outcomes in people with advanced lung cancer is currently unclear.
OBJECTIVES
The primary aim of this review was to investigate the effects of exercise training on exercise capacity in adults with advanced lung cancer. Exercise capacity was defined as the six-minute walk distance (6MWD; in meters) measured during a six-minute walk test (6MWT; i.e. how far an individual can walk in six minutes on a flat course), or the peak oxygen uptake (i.e. VO₂peak) measured during a maximal incremental cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET).The secondary aims were to determine the effects of exercise training on the force-generating capacity of peripheral muscles, disease-specific global HRQoL, physical functioning component of HRQoL, dyspnoea, fatigue, feelings of anxiety and depression, lung function, level of physical activity, adverse events, performance status, body weight and overall survival in adults with advanced lung cancer.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase (via Ovid), CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PEDro, and SciELO on 7 July 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared exercise training versus no exercise training in adults with advanced lung cancer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened the studies and selected those for inclusion. We performed meta-analyses for the following outcomes: exercise capacity, disease-specific global HRQoL, physical functioning HRQoL, dyspnoea, fatigue, feelings of anxiety and depression, and lung function (forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV)). Two studies reported force-generating capacity of peripheral muscles, and we presented the results narratively. Limited data were available for level of physical activity, adverse events, performance status, body weight and overall survival.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified six RCTs, involving 221 participants. The mean age of participants ranged from 59 to 70 years; the sample size ranged from 20 to 111 participants. Overall, we found that the risk of bias in the included studies was high, and the quality of evidence for all outcomes was low.Pooled data from four studies demonstrated that, on completion of the intervention period, exercise capacity (6MWD) was significantly higher in the intervention group than the control group (mean difference (MD) 63.33 m; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.70 to 122.96). On completion of the intervention period, disease-specific global HRQoL was significantly better in the intervention group compared to the control group (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.51; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.93). There was no significant difference between the intervention and control groups in physical functioning HRQoL (SMD 0.11; 95% CI -0.36 to 0.58), dyspnoea (SMD -0.27; 95% CI -0.64 to 0.10), fatigue (SMD 0.03; 95% CI -0.51 to 0.58), feelings of anxiety (MD -1.21 units on Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; 95% CI -5.88 to 3.45) and depression (SMD -1.26; 95% CI -4.68 to 2.17), and FEV (SMD 0.43; 95% CI -0.11 to 0.97).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Exercise training may improve or avoid the decline in exercise capacity and disease-specific global HRQoL for adults with advanced lung cancer. We found no significant effects of exercise training on dyspnoea, fatigue, feelings of anxiety and depression, or lung function. The findings of this review should be viewed with caution because of the heterogeneity between studies, the small sample sizes, and the high risk of bias of included studies. Larger, high-quality RCTs are needed to confirm and expand knowledge on the effects of exercise training in this population.
Topics: Aged; Cardiovascular Deconditioning; Exercise; Exercise Tolerance; Female; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Middle Aged; Muscle Strength; Oxygen Consumption; Quality of Life; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Walk Test
PubMed: 30741408
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD012685.pub2 -
Therapeutic Advances in Respiratory... 2023Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has been considered to be an effective treatment method for various respiratory diseases. However, the effects of exercise-based PR on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has been considered to be an effective treatment method for various respiratory diseases. However, the effects of exercise-based PR on patients with severe/very severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are unclear. This review aimed to investigate the effects of exercise-based PR on patients with severe/very severe COPD.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from inception to December 23, 2022, without language restrictions. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effects of exercise-based PR on patients with severe/very severe COPD were included. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently. RevMan software (version 5.3) was used for meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was rated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system.
RESULTS
Six studies (263 patients) were identified. Compared with the control group, the 6-min walking distance [MD = 52.91, 95% CI (3.80, 102.03)], the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire total scores [MD = -7.70, 95% CI (-14.32, -1.08)] and the Borg scale scores [MD = -0.68, 95% CI (-1.28, -0.08)] in the experimental group improved, respectively. The St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire and Borg scale scores were rated as 'moderate quality' and 'low quality', respectively, and the 6-min walking distance was rated as 'very low quality'.
CONCLUSIONS
Exercise-based PR may improve the exercise capacity, quality of life and dyspnea of patients with severe/very severe COPD, which can be regarded as an adjuvant treatment. High quality and large sample RCTs are needed.
REGISTRATION
This systematic review and meta-analysis protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (No. CRD42022294085).
Topics: Humans; Lung; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Exercise Therapy; Dyspnea; Quality of Life; Exercise Tolerance
PubMed: 36946384
DOI: 10.1177/17534666231162250 -
Frontiers in Medicine 2022Evidence increasingly suggested that impaired respiratory function remained in about 40% of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after discharge,...
BACKGROUND
Evidence increasingly suggested that impaired respiratory function remained in about 40% of patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) after discharge, jeopardizing their activities of daily living and quality of life (QoL) in a long term. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) can improve exercise capacity and QoL in individuals with chronic lung disease; however, evidence on the effect of PR for patients with post-COIVD-19 was scarce. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of PR on lung impairment for patients with post-COVID-19.
METHODS
Five databases were searched for all the published trials of PR for patients with post-COVID-19 from 2019 to October 2021. Data were extracted using a standardized form. The risks of bias of included studies were assessed using the Cochrane risk of the bias assessment tool. Data were synthesized where possible; otherwise, qualitative analysis was done.
RESULTS
Among 6,000 retrieved studies, 3 studies with 233 patients after COVID-19 were included. The pooled estimate of PR effect on 6-min walk test (6-MWT) (50.41, 95% CI 34.34 to 66.48; < 0.0001) was in favor of the experiment group with clinical importance. It is found that PR could improve the symptom of dyspnea and QoL; however, its effect on pulmonary function test was inconsistent across studies. The risk of bias of included studies varied, with major concerns on the risk of blinding of participants and interventions performers.
CONCLUSION
The review showed that PR could improve exercise capacity measured by 6-MWT among patients with mild-to-moderate lung impairment after COVID-19. The interpretation of effects on lung function, dyspnea, and QoL should be cautious due to inadequate and conflicting data reported across studies.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021289562, identifier: CRD42021289562.
PubMed: 35265644
DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.837420