-
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... May 2022Post-acute coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) syndrome is now recognized as a complex systemic disease that is associated with substantial morbidity. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Post-acute coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) syndrome is now recognized as a complex systemic disease that is associated with substantial morbidity.
OBJECTIVES
To estimate the prevalence of persistent symptoms and signs at least 12 weeks after acute COVID-19 at different follow-up periods.
DATA SOURCES
Searches were conducted up to October 2021 in Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, and PubMed.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS
Articles in English that reported the prevalence of persistent symptoms among individuals with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection and included at least 50 patients with a follow-up of at least 12 weeks after acute illness.
METHODS
Random-effect meta-analysis was performed to produce a pooled prevalence for each symptom at four different follow-up time intervals. Between-study heterogeneity was evaluated using the I2 statistic and was explored via meta-regression, considering several a priori study-level variables. Risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for prevalence studies and comparative studies, respectively.
RESULTS
After screening 3209 studies, a total of 63 studies were eligible, with a total COVID-19 population of 257 348. The most commonly reported symptoms were fatigue, dyspnea, sleep disorder, and difficulty concentrating (32%, 25%, 24%, and 22%, respectively, at 3- to <6-month follow-up); effort intolerance, fatigue, sleep disorder, and dyspnea (45%, 36%, 29%, and 25%, respectively, at 6- to <9-month follow-up); fatigue (37%) and dyspnea (21%) at 9 to <12 months; and fatigue, dyspnea, sleep disorder, and myalgia (41%, 31%, 30%, and 22%, respectively, at >12-month follow-up). There was substantial between-study heterogeneity for all reported symptom prevalences. Meta-regressions identified statistically significant effect modifiers: world region, male sex, diabetes mellitus, disease severity, and overall study quality score. Five of six studies including a comparator group consisting of COVID-19-negative cases observed significant adjusted associations between COVID-19 and several long-term symptoms.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review found that a large proportion of patients experience post-acute COVID-19 syndrome 3 to 12 months after recovery from the acute phase of COVID-19. However, available studies of post-acute COVID-19 syndrome are highly heterogeneous. Future studies need to have appropriate comparator groups, standardized symptom definitions and measurements, and longer follow-up.
Topics: COVID-19; Dyspnea; Fatigue; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Male; Prevalence; SARS-CoV-2; Sleep Wake Disorders; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
PubMed: 35124265
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2022.01.014 -
Journal of Thoracic Disease Mar 2020Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive disease associated with significant dyspnea and limited exercise capacity. This systematic review aimed to... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a progressive disease associated with significant dyspnea and limited exercise capacity. This systematic review aimed to synthesize evidence of exercise interventions during pulmonary rehabilitation that aim to improve exercise capacity, dyspnea, and health-related quality of life (HRQL) in IPF patients.
METHODS
Searches were performed in MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, SPORTDiscus, PubMed and PEDro from inception to January 2019 using search terms for: (I) participants: 'IPF or interstitial lung disease'; (II) interventions: 'aerobic training or resistance training or respiratory muscle training'; and (III) outcomes: 'exercise capacity or dyspnea or health-related quality of life'. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts and full texts to identify eligible studies. Methodological quality of studies was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist and meta-analyses were performed.
RESULTS
Of 1,677 articles identified, 14 were included (four randomized controlled trials and 10 prospective pre-post design studies) that examined 362 patients receiving training and 95 control subjects. Exercise capacity was measured with the 6-minute walk distance, peak oxygen consumption, peak work rate, or endurance time for constant work rate cycling, which increased after exercise [aerobic exercise; aerobic and breathing exercises; aerobic and inspiratory muscle training (IMT) exercises] compared to the control groups. Dyspnea scores improved after aerobic and breathing exercises. HRQL also improved after aerobic exercise training alone or combined with breathing exercises. Aerobic training alone or combined with IMT or breathing exercises improved exercise capacity.
CONCLUSIONS
Breathing exercises appears to complement exercise training towards improved dyspnea and HRQL in patients with IPF.
PubMed: 32274173
DOI: 10.21037/jtd.2019.12.27 -
International Journal of Clinical... Oct 2021To identify, systematically evaluate and summarise the best available evidence on the frequency of long COVID-19 (post-acute COVID-19 syndrome), its clinical... (Review)
Review
AIMS
To identify, systematically evaluate and summarise the best available evidence on the frequency of long COVID-19 (post-acute COVID-19 syndrome), its clinical manifestations, and the criteria used for diagnosis.
METHODS
Systematic review conducted with a comprehensive search including formal databases, COVID-19 or SARS-CoV-2 data sources, grey literature, and manual search. We considered for inclusion clinical trials, observational longitudinal comparative and non-comparative studies, cross-sectional, before-and-after, and case series. We assessed the methodological quality by specific tools based on the study designs. We presented the results as a narrative synthesis regarding the frequency and duration of long COVID-19, signs and symptoms, criteria used for diagnosis, and potential risk factors.
RESULTS
We included 25 observational studies with moderate to high methodological quality, considering 5440 participants. The frequency of long COVID-19 ranged from 4.7% to 80%, and the most prevalent signs/symptoms were chest pain (up to 89%), fatigue (up to 65%), dyspnea (up to 61%), and cough and sputum production (up to 59%). Temporal criteria used to define long COVID-19 varied from 3 to 24 weeks after acute phase or hospital discharge. Potentially associated risk factors were old age, female sex, severe clinical status, a high number of comorbidities, hospital admission, and oxygen supplementation at the acute phase. However, limitations related to study designs added uncertainty to this finding. None of the studies assessed the duration of signs/symptoms.
CONCLUSION
The frequency of long COVID-19 reached up to 80% over the studies included and occurred between 3 and 24 weeks after acute phase or hospital discharge. Chest pain, fatigue, dyspnea, and cough were the most reported clinical manifestations attributed to the condition. Based on these systematic review findings, there is an urgent need to understand this emerging, complex and challenging medical condition. Proposals for diagnostic criteria and standard terminology are welcome.
Topics: COVID-19; Cross-Sectional Studies; Dyspnea; Female; Humans; SARS-CoV-2; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
PubMed: 33977626
DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.14357 -
Journal of Palliative Medicine May 2023The objective of this systematic review is to consolidate the existing evidence on opioid use, including administration, dosing, and efficacy, for the relief of dyspnea... (Review)
Review
The objective of this systematic review is to consolidate the existing evidence on opioid use, including administration, dosing, and efficacy, for the relief of dyspnea at end of life. The overarching goal is to optimize clinical management of dyspnea by identifying patterns in opioid use, improving opioid management of dyspnea, and to prioritize future research. Opioids are commonly used in the management of dyspnea at end of life, yet specific administration guidelines are limited. A greater understanding of the effectiveness of opioids in relieving end-of-life dyspnea with consideration of study design, patients, and opioids, including dyspnea evaluation tools and outcomes, will leverage development of standardized administration and dosing. A PRISMA-guided systematic review using six databases identified quality studies of opioid management for patients with dyspnea at end of life. Twenty-three references met review inclusion criteria, which included terminally ill cancer and noncancer patients with various diagnoses. Studies included two randomized controlled trials, and three nonrandomized experimental, three prospective observational, one cross-sectional, and one case series. Thirteen retrospective chart reviews were also included due to the limited rigorous studies rendered by the search. Thirteen studies evaluated morphine, followed by fentanyl (6), oxycodone (5), general opioid use (4), and hydromorphone (2). Routes of administration were parenteral, oral, combination, and nebulization. Dyspnea was evaluated using self-reporting and non-self-reporting evaluation tools. Sedation was the most reported opioid-related adverse effect. Challenges persist in conducting end-of-life research, preventing consensus on standardization of opioid treatment for dyspnea within this specific palliative time frame. Future robust prospective trials using specific, accurate assessment with reassessment of dyspnea/respiratory distress, and consideration of opioid tolerance, polypharmacy, and comorbidities are required.
Topics: Humans; Analgesics, Opioid; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Cross-Sectional Studies; Drug Tolerance; Morphine; Dyspnea; Death; Observational Studies as Topic
PubMed: 36453988
DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2022.0311 -
Archives of Physical Medicine and... Oct 2022To qualitatively synthesize and quantitatively evaluate the effect of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) on dyspnea, lung functions, fatigue, exercise capacity, and quality... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effect of Pulmonary Rehabilitation Approaches on Dyspnea, Exercise Capacity, Fatigue, Lung Functions, and Quality of Life in Patients With COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVE
To qualitatively synthesize and quantitatively evaluate the effect of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) on dyspnea, lung functions, fatigue, exercise capacity, and quality of life (QoL) in patients with COVID-19.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were searched from January 2020 to April 2022.
DATA SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of PR on dyspnea, lung functions, fatigue, exercise capacity, and QoL in patients with COVID-19.
DATA EXTRACTION
The mean difference (MD) and a 95% CI were estimated for all the outcome measures using random effect models. The following data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers: (1) first author; (2) publication year; (3) nationality; (4) number of patients included (5) comorbidities; (6) ventilatory support; (7) length of inpatient stay; (8) type of PR; (9) outcome measures; and (10) main findings. The risk of bias was evaluated using the cochrane risk of bias tool.
DATA SYNTHESIS
A total of 8 RCTs involving 449 participants were included in the review. PR was found to be significantly effective in improving dyspnea (5 studies, SMD -2.11 [95% CI, -2.96 to -1.27; P<.001]) and exercise capacity (MD 65.85 m [95% CI, 42.86 to 88.83; P<.001]) in patients with both acute and chronic COVID-19 with mild to severe symptoms, whereas fatigue (MD -2.42 [95% CI, -2.72 to -2.11, P<.05]) and lung functions (MD 0.26 L [95% CI, 0.04 to 0.48, P<.05]) were significantly improved in acute COVID-19 patients with mild symptoms. The effect of PR on QoL was inconsistent across studies. PR was found to be safe and feasible for patients with COVID-19.
CONCLUSION
Evidence from studies indicates that PR program is superior to no intervention in improving dyspnea, exercise capacity, lung functions, and fatigue in patients with COVID-19. PR appears to be safe and beneficial for both acute and chronic COVID-19 patients.
Topics: COVID-19; Dyspnea; Exercise Tolerance; Fatigue; Humans; Lung; Quality of Life
PubMed: 35908659
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2022.06.007 -
Scientific Reports Aug 2021COVID-19 can involve persistence, sequelae, and other medical complications that last weeks to months after initial recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
COVID-19 can involve persistence, sequelae, and other medical complications that last weeks to months after initial recovery. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to identify studies assessing the long-term effects of COVID-19. LitCOVID and Embase were searched to identify articles with original data published before the 1st of January 2021, with a minimum of 100 patients. For effects reported in two or more studies, meta-analyses using a random-effects model were performed using the MetaXL software to estimate the pooled prevalence with 95% CI. PRISMA guidelines were followed. A total of 18,251 publications were identified, of which 15 met the inclusion criteria. The prevalence of 55 long-term effects was estimated, 21 meta-analyses were performed, and 47,910 patients were included (age 17-87 years). The included studies defined long-COVID as ranging from 14 to 110 days post-viral infection. It was estimated that 80% of the infected patients with SARS-CoV-2 developed one or more long-term symptoms. The five most common symptoms were fatigue (58%), headache (44%), attention disorder (27%), hair loss (25%), and dyspnea (24%). Multi-disciplinary teams are crucial to developing preventive measures, rehabilitation techniques, and clinical management strategies with whole-patient perspectives designed to address long COVID-19 care.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alopecia; Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity; COVID-19; Dyspnea; Fatigue; Headache; Humans; Middle Aged; SARS-CoV-2; Young Adult
PubMed: 34373540
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-95565-8 -
International Journal of Environmental... Apr 2022Increasing numbers of individuals suffer from post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS), which manifests with persistent symptoms, the most prevalent being dyspnea, fatigue,... (Review)
Review
Increasing numbers of individuals suffer from post-acute COVID-19 syndrome (PACS), which manifests with persistent symptoms, the most prevalent being dyspnea, fatigue, and musculoskeletal, cognitive, and/or mental health impairments. This systematic review investigated the effectiveness of rehabilitation interventions for individuals with PACS. We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, CINHAL, Scopus, Prospero, and PEDro databases and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) up to November 2021. We screened 516 citations for eligibility, i.e., trials that included individuals with PACS exposed to exercise-based rehabilitation interventions. Five RCTs were included, accounting for 512 participants (aged 49.2-69.4 years, 65% males). Based on the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool (RoB 2.0), two RCTs had "low risk of bias", and three were in the "some concerns" category. Three RCTs compared experimental rehabilitation interventions with no or minimal rehabilitation, while two compared two active rehabilitation interventions. Rehabilitation seemed to improve dyspnea, anxiety, and kinesiophobia. Results on pulmonary function were inconsistent, while improvements were detected in muscle strength, walking capacity, sit-to-stand performance, and quality of life. Pending further studies based on qualitatively sound designs, these first findings seem to advocate for rehabilitation interventions to lessen disability due to PACS.
Topics: COVID-19; Dyspnea; Exercise Therapy; Female; Humans; Male; Quality of Life; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome
PubMed: 35564579
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19095185 -
The Clinical Respiratory Journal Jul 2018In chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), quality of life and exercise capacity are altered in relationship to dyspnea. Benefits of inspiratory muscle training... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
In chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), quality of life and exercise capacity are altered in relationship to dyspnea. Benefits of inspiratory muscle training (IMT) on quality of life, dyspnea, and exercise capacity were demonstrated, but when it is associated to pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), its efficacy on dyspnea is not demonstrated. The aim of this systematic review with meta-analysis was to verify the effect of IMT using threshold devices in COPD patients on dyspnea, quality of life, exercise capacity, and inspiratory muscles strength, and the added effect on dyspnea of IMT associated with PR (vs. PR alone).
STUDY SELECTION
This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted on the databases from PubMed, Science direct, Cochrane library, Web of science, and Pascal. Following key words were used: inspiratory, respiratory, ventilatory, muscle, and training. The searching period extended to December 2017. Two reviewers independently assessed studies quality.
RESULTS
Forty-three studies were included in the systematic review and thirty-seven studies in the meta-analysis. Overall treatment group consisted of six hundred forty two patients. Dyspnea (Baseline Dyspnea Index) is decreased after IMT. Quality of life (Saint George's Respiratory Questionnaire), exercise capacity (6 min walk test) and Maximal inspiratory pressure were increased after IMT. During PR, no added effect of IMT on dyspnea was found.
CONCLUSION
IMT using threshold devices improves inspiratory muscle strength, exercise capacity and quality of life, decreases dyspnea. However, there is no added effect of IMT on dyspnea during PR (compared with PR alone).
Topics: Breathing Exercises; Dyspnea; Female; Humans; Male; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life; Respiratory Muscles; Walk Test
PubMed: 29665262
DOI: 10.1111/crj.12905 -
JAMA Network Open Sep 2023Current rehabilitation guidelines for patients with post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) are primarily based on expert opinions and observational data, and there is an urgent... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
Current rehabilitation guidelines for patients with post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) are primarily based on expert opinions and observational data, and there is an urgent need for evidence-based rehabilitation interventions to support patients with PCC.
OBJECTIVE
To synthesize the findings of existing studies that report on physical capacity (including functional exercise capacity, muscle function, dyspnea, and respiratory function) and quality of life outcomes following rehabilitation interventions in patients with PCC.
DATA SOURCES
A systematic electronic search was performed from January 2020 until February 2023, in MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and the Clinical Trials Registry. Key terms that were used to identify potentially relevant studies included long-covid, post-covid, sequelae, exercise therapy, rehabilitation, physical activity, physical therapy, and randomized controlled trial.
STUDY SELECTION
This study included randomized clinical trials that compared respiratory training and exercise-based rehabilitation interventions with either placebo, usual care, waiting list, or control in patients with PCC.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. A pairwise bayesian random-effects meta-analysis was performed using vague prior distributions. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool version 2, and the certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE system by 2 independent researchers.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
The primary outcome was functional exercise capacity, measured at the closest postintervention time point by the 6-minute walking test. Secondary outcomes were fatigue, lower limb muscle function, dyspnea, respiratory function, and quality of life. All outcomes were defined a priori. Continuous outcomes were reported as standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) and binary outcomes were summarized as odds ratios with 95% CrIs. The between-trial heterogeneity was quantified using the between-study variance, τ2, and 95% CrIs.
RESULTS
Of 1834 identified records, 1193 were screened, and 14 trials (1244 patients; 45% female participants; median [IQR] age, 50 [47 to 56] years) were included in the analyses. Rehabilitation interventions were associated with improvements in functional exercise capacity (SMD, -0.56; 95% CrI, -0.87 to -0.22) with moderate certainty in 7 trials (389 participants). These improvements had a 99% posterior probability of superiority when compared with current standard care. The value of τ2 (0.04; 95% CrI, 0.00 to 0.60) indicated low statistical heterogeneity. However, there was significant uncertainty and imprecision regarding the probability of experiencing exercise-induced adverse events (odds ratio, 1.68; 95% CrI, 0.32 to 9.94).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
The findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that rehabilitation interventions are associated with improvements in functional exercise capacity, dyspnea, and quality of life, with a high probability of improvement compared with the current standard care; the certainty of evidence was moderate for functional exercise capacity and quality of life and low for other outcomes. Given the uncertainty surrounding the safety outcomes, additional trials with enhanced monitoring of adverse events are necessary.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Female; Middle Aged; Male; Quality of Life; Post-Acute COVID-19 Syndrome; Bayes Theorem; COVID-19; Dyspnea; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37725376
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.33838 -
Advances in Therapy Jan 2022This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on pulmonary function and exercise capacity in individuals with chronic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Effects of High-Intensity Interval Training on Pulmonary Function and Exercise Capacity in Individuals with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.
INTRODUCTION
This study aimed to examine the effectiveness of high-intensity interval training (HIIT) on pulmonary function and exercise capacity in individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).
METHODS
Ten databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, CNKI, Wanfang, Weipu, and CBM) were searched for relevant articles published from inception to 30 June 2020. Studies were included if they were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing a HIIT group with usual care or other training groups. Quality was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale, and the overall quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. The primary outcomes were peak VO and FEV% predicted, and the secondary outcomes were FEV/FVC, peak V, peak WR, 6MWD, dyspnea, health-related quality of life, and adverse event.
RESULTS
Twelve articles (689 patients) were included. HIIT was shown to have a positive effect on exercise capacity (peak WR, 6MWD), pulmonary function (FEV% pred, peak V), dyspnea, and quality of life. However, sensitivity analyses for dyspnea were unstable, and the result changed from positive to negative after removing one study (SMD = - 0.13, 95% CI [- 0.44, 0.17], P = 0.40).
CONCLUSIONS
HIIT could improve pulmonary function, exercise capacity, and quality of life but may not decrease dyspnea in patients with COPD. It can be recommended as a safe and effective exercise modality in rehabilitation programs. Given that the overall results were based on a limited number of studies with significant heterogeneity and some of the results were based on low GRADE rating evidence, more high-quality, larger sample size, multicenter, and long-term follow-up RCTs are needed to confirm the clinical efficacy of HIIT in patients with COPD.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION
CRD42020165897.
Topics: Dyspnea; Exercise Tolerance; High-Intensity Interval Training; Humans; Multicenter Studies as Topic; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Quality of Life
PubMed: 34792785
DOI: 10.1007/s12325-021-01920-6