Health status instruments for patients with COPD in pulmonary rehabilitation: defining a minimal clinically important difference

Vitamin D for the management of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

COPD is a common, preventable and treatable airway disease, and is currently the third leading cause of death worldwide. About one billion people worldwide are estimated to have vitamin D deficiency or insufficiency. Vitamin D deficiency is common among people with COPD, and has been reported to be associated with reduced lung function and increased risk of acute exacerbations of COPD. Several clinical trials of vitamin D to prevent acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) and improve COPD control have been conducted, but an up-to-date meta-analysis of all double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials of this intervention is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of vitamin D for the management of acute exacerbations and symptoms for people with COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register and reference lists of articles. We also searched trial registries directly, and contacted the authors of studies in order to identify additional trials. The date of the last search was 24 August 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials of vitamin D or its hydroxylated metabolites, for adults with a clinical diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease based on the presence of characteristic symptoms and irreversible airflow obstruction. We did not impose restrictions regarding disease severity or baseline vitamin D status, in order to maximise generalisability.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. The primary outcome was the rate of moderate or severe exacerbations (requiring systemic corticosteroids, antibiotics or both). We also performed subgroup analyses to determine whether the effect of vitamin D on the rate of moderate or severe exacerbations was modified by baseline vitamin D status, COPD severity or regular inhaled corticosteroid use. The main secondary outcomes of interest were the proportion of participants experiencing one or more exacerbations (moderate or severe), the change in forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1, % predicted) and the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse events of any cause, mortality (all-cause) and quality of life. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 10 double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials in this review, involving a total of 1372 adults. Five studies contributed to the primary outcome analysis of the rate of moderate or severe exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, antibiotics or both. The duration of studies ranged from six weeks to 40 months, and all investigated the effects of administering cholecalciferol (vitamin D3). One study included two intervention arms, one where vitamin D3 was given and one where calcitriol (1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D) was given. The majority of participants had mild to moderate COPD, and profound vitamin D deficiency (25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) < 25 nmol/L) at baseline was rare (123 participants contributing data to subgroup analysis). Administration of vitamin D or its hydroxylated metabolites results in little to no change in the overall rate of exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, antibiotics or both (rate ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.11; 5 studies, 980 participants; high-certainty evidence). Vitamin D supplementation did not influence any meta-analysed secondary outcomes. These were all based on moderate- or high-certainty evidence aside from adverse events and quality of life, which were based on low-certainty evidence. We observed little to no change in the proportion of participants experiencing one or more moderate or severe exacerbations (odds ratio (OR) 0.94, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.24; 5 studies, 980 participants; high-certainty evidence). Additionally, vitamin D probably results in little to no difference in the inter-arm mean change in FEV1 (% predicted) (mean difference 2.82 higher in intervention arm, 95% CI -2.42 to 8.06; 7 studies, 1063 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was also probably no effect of vitamin D on the incidence of serious adverse events due to any cause; although we identified an anticipated absolute effect of 36 additional adverse events per 1000 people, the confidence interval included the null hypothesis of no effect (OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.71; 5 studies, 663 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Vitamin D may have little to no effect on mortality (OR 1.13, 95% CI 0.57 to 2.21; 6 studies, 1019 participants; low-certainty evidence). It also may have little to no effect on quality of life as measured by validated instruments (narrative findings; 5 studies, 663 participants; low-certainty evidence). We assessed one study as being at high risk of bias in at least one domain; this did not contribute data to the meta-analysis of the primary outcome reported above. Sensitivity analysis that excluded this study from the meta-analysed outcome to which it contributed, the inter-arm mean change in FEV1, did not change the findings.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found that administration of vitamin D results in little to no effect on the rate of moderate or severe exacerbations requiring systemic corticosteroids, antibiotics or both or the proportion of participants experiencing one or more exacerbations (moderate or severe) (both high-certainty evidence). Further, vitamin D probably has no effect on the inter-arm difference in change in lung volumes and the proportion of participants with one or more serious adverse event of any cause (both moderate-certainty evidence), and may make little to no difference to mortality or quality of life (both low-certainty evidence). We recommend further research on the balance of benefits and harms of vitamin D supplements in COPD for those with very low or very high starting vitamin D levels, because we assessed the available evidence as low-certainty for these groups.

Predictors of Quality-of-Life Improvement at Different Minimum Clinically Important Difference Values in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease after Climatic Rehabilitation Treatment

BACKGROUND

The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) is debated in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) quality-of-life (QoL) assessments. This study aimed to determine whether there is a difference in predictors of clinically significant improvement between the traditional (value of 4) and newly proposed MCID SGRQ (value of 7) after climatic rehabilitation treatment. Climatic rehabilitation treatment consists of two main parts: climatotherapy, which typically involves the controlled exposure of individuals to natural environmental elements, and climatic rehabilitation, which includes other therapeutic factors such as physical activities as well as educating the patient to change their lifestyle.

METHODS

This study included 90 consecutive patients diagnosed with COPD who underwent structured complex pulmonary rehabilitation in High Tatras, part of the Carpathian Mountains. The examination before and after treatment included spirometry, QoL assessment using the SGRQ, 6 min walk test (6-MWT), and the Borg, Beck and Zung scale.

RESULTS

Patients showed statistically significant improvement after the intervention in FEV1, FEV1/FVC, 6-MWT, (p < 0.001), anxiety scores, depression, and improvement in dyspnoea both before and after the 6-MWT (p < 0.001). For both MCID for SGRQ levels 4 and 7, we confirmed the same predictors of clinical improvement for bronchial obstruction grade (spirometry) and exercise capacity (6-MWT), for quality of life in activity score and total score.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that both the proposed MCID for SGRQ values could be sufficient to assess the clinical significance of the achieved change in health status when assessing the need for pulmonary rehabilitation comprising climatotherapy in patients with COPD.

Additive benefit of rehabilitation on physical status, symptoms and mental health after hospitalisation for severe COVID-19 pneumonia

INTRODUCTION

The potential additive benefits of rehabilitation beyond spontaneous recovery post-COVID-19 currently remain unknown.

METHODS

In this prospective, interventional, non-randomised parallel assignment two-arm study, we investigated the effects of an 8-week rehabilitation programme (Rehab, n=25) added to usual care (UC) versus UC (n=27) on respiratory symptoms, fatigue, functional capacity, mental health and health-related quality of life in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia, 6-8 weeks post-hospital discharge. The rehabilitation programme included exercise, education, dietary and psychological support. Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, respiratory and heart failure were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

At baseline, groups were not different in mean age (56 years), gender (53% female), intensive care unit admission (61%), intubation (39%), days of hospitalisation (25), number of symptoms (9) and number of comorbidities (1.4). Baseline evaluation was conducted at median (IQR) 76 (27) days after symptoms onset. Groups were not different regarding baseline evaluation outcomes. At 8 weeks, Rehab showed significantly greater improvement in COPD Assessment Test by a mean±SEM (95% CI) 7.07±1.36 (4.29-9.84), p <0.001 and all three fatigue questionnaires: Chalder-Likert: 5.65±1.27 (3.04-8.25), p <0.001; bimodal: 3.04±0.86 (1.28-4.79), p=0.001; Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy: 6.37±2.09 (2.08-10.65), p=0.005 and Fatigue Severity Scale: 1.36±0.433 (0.47-2.25), p=0.004. At 8 weeks rehab also showed significantly greater improvment in Short Physical Performance Battery: 1.13±0.33 (0.46-1.79), p=0.002; Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) Anxiety: 2.93±1.01 (0.67-5.18), p=0.013; Beck Depression Inventory: 7.81±3.07 (1.52-14.09), p=0.017; Montreal Cognitive Assessment: 2.83±0.63 (1.5-4.14), p <0.001; EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) Utility Index: 0.21±0.05 (0.1-0.32), p=0.001 and Visual Analogue Scale: 6.57±3.21 (0.2-13.16), p=0.043. Both groups significantly improved 6-min walking distance by approximately 60 m and pulmonary function measures, whereas post-traumatic stress disorder measurement IES-R (Impact of Event Scale, Revised) and HADS-Depression score were not different between groups at 8 weeks. A 16% attrition rate was observed in the rehabilitation group exhibiting a threefold increase in training workload. There were no adverse effects reported during exercise training.

DISCUSSION

These findings highlight the added value of rehabilitation post-COVID-19 to amplify the natural course of physical and mental recovery that otherwise would remain incomplete with UC.

Breathing Control Exercises Delivered in a Group Setting for Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Breathing control exercises are an important component of occupational therapy in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Delivering these exercises in group settings may enhance their benefits. Therefore, this study assessed the effectiveness of breathing control exercises delivered in a group format to patients with severe COPD remitting from an acute pulmonary exacerbation. This randomized controlled trial of 6 weeks’ duration compared the addition of breathing exercise sessions delivered in a group setting to a standard exercise inpatient rehabilitation program (usual care) versus usual care alone. The standard exercise program consisted of endurance and strength training and therapeutic patient education. The intervention group received, in addition to usual care, 20 sessions of 30 min duration of breathing control exercises in a group setting. The primary outcome was quality of life (Saint George’s Respiratory Questionnaire). Secondary outcomes were the COPD assessment test, modified Borg scale, handgrip strength test, and five-time sit-to-stand test. Thirty-seven patients aged 69 ± 7 years were recruited. After the 6-week period, all outcomes significantly improved and exceeded the minimal clinically important difference in the intervention group only. Between-group changes were significant for each outcome. Conclusions: breathing control exercises in a group setting provide clinically relevant benefits in patients with severe COPD who are remitting from an acute pulmonary exacerbation.

The effect of comprehensive multidisciplinary pulmonary rehabilitation on 5-year survival in COPD: does maintaining a home exercise program improve survival?

BACKGROUND

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is one of the most common causes of death worldwide. Therefore, optimizing medical therapy in the comprehensive management of the disease, as well as including pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in the treatment, is essential. The goal of our study was to determine the impact of PR on the survival of COPD patients.

METHODS

Between 2007-2015, 509 COPD patients who completed the PR constituted the PR group, while 167 patients who applied but could not complete it after the initial evaluations formed the control group. In the PR group, dyspnea perception, exercise capacity, muscle strength, body composition, quality of life, psychosocial status, and i-BODE scores were assessed at the beginning and end of the program, whereas in the control group, these assessments could only be conducted at the beginning. Also, after PR, our PR participants have prescribed a home exercise program, and they were recalled to the hospital at the 3rd, 6th, 12th, 18th, and 24th months for follow-up visits.

RESULTS

A statistically significant improvement was found in almost all the data (except FEV1/FVC, BORG after exercise, and FFMI) after PR. There was a statistically significant difference in 5-year survival in favor of the PR group (p = 0.006), and in PR patients who accompanied the home exercise program vs. those who did not (p = 0.000). Also the gains in MRC (p = 0.003; OR: 2.20; CI: 1.319- 3.682), MEP (p = 0.041; OR: 1.02; CI: 1.001-1.035), and i-BODE (p = 0.006; OR: 0.914; CI: 0.857-0.974) increased the survival.

DISCUSSION

Apart from incorporating PR into treatment in the comprehensive management of COPD, we demonstrated that maintaining a home exercise program for at least two years following PR increased 5-year survival significantly.

Factors Affecting the Success of Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Asthma

Objective: The majority of patients with asthma limit their physical activity due to the fear of exercise dyspnea. Regular exercise, on the other hand, is currently suggested as one of the non-pharmaceutical treatment alternatives for patients with asthma since it improves their quality of life and symptom control. This study aimed to investigate the indicators of success in patients with asthma receiving pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). Methods: A total of 131 patients with the diagnosis of asthma were included in the study. All patients attended an 8-week comprehensive, multidisciplinary, outpatient and individualized PR program. Results: The factors related to the gains in dyspnea perception, exercise capacity, peripheral muscle strength, respiratory muscle strength and quality of life were evaluated. In the multivariate linear regression analysis, the gain in dyspnea perception is related to baseline dyspnea. The gain in exercise capacity is related to baseline exercise capacity and the amount of smoking. The gain in peripheral muscle strength is related to gender. The gain in respiratory muscle strength is related to age, and finally the gain in quality of life is related to baseline dyspnea and anxiety levels. Conclusion: Especially men, young people, heavy smokers, and those with low initial exercise capacity, high perception of dyspnea, and high anxiety are more likely to benefit from PR.

Improved health status of severe COPD patients after being included in an integrated primary care service: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a prevalent lung disease. It is assumed that severe patients will receive better treatment in specialised care centres but the prevalence of severe COPD in primary care is high. Integrated primary care services combine input from several sources and advice from pulmonologists to provide general practitioners with support needed to improve diagnosis and treatment of patients with COPD.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate patient-reported outcomes and costs of managing patients classified as GOLD D in an integrated primary care service over 12 months.

METHODS

Patients were included in this 1-year prospective cohort study if they met the 2014 GOLD D criteria, were aged ≥ 40 years and gave written informed consent for this study. Recruitment took place through the patients' general practitioners. The primary outcome was health status, assessed with the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) and COPD Assessment Test (CAT). Secondary outcomes included self-reported exacerbations, quality-adjusted life years and health(care)-related costs.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients were included. At baseline, the mean CAT score was 15.9 and the median CCQ score was 1.7. After 12 months, scores had improved by 2.3 (95% confidence interval, 0.8-3.7) and 0.4 (95% confidence interval, 0.2-0.7), respectively. Percentage of patients with ≥2 exacerbations in the past 12 months also decreased from baseline (77.6%) to 12 months (16.7%). Changes in mean quarterly costs were small.

CONCLUSION

An integrated service for COPD based in primary care may improve the health status of patients with a large burden of disease while not increasing health care costs.

Estimating the minimal clinically important difference for balance and gait outcome measures in individuals with vestibular disorders

BACKGROUND

Vestibular Rehabilitation Therapists (VRT) utilize outcome measures to quantify gait and balance abilities in individuals with vestibular disorders (IVD). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in gait and balance outcome measures for IVD is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study is to estimate the MCID of the Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC), Functional Gait Assessment (FGA), and Gait Speed (GS) using distribution and anchor-based methods relative to the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) in IVD.

METHODS

Data were collected using a retrospective chart review from two outpatient Vestibular Rehabilitation (VR) clinics. Data included demographic characteristics, diagnosis, VR course, and pre and post outcome measures including DHI, ABC, FGA, and GS. The DHI was used to classify subjects as "responders" or "non-responders" in order to calculate MCID values.

RESULTS

The total number of subjects analyzed for each outcome measure was 222 for the ABC, 220 for FGA, and 237 for GS. Subjects made statistically significant improvements in ABC, DHI, FGA, and GS (p <  0.001) from pre to post VR. The MCID calculated for ABC, FGA, and GS using the anchor-based approach was 18.1%, 4 points, and 0.09 m/s respectively. The MCIDs calculated using distribution-based approach for the ABC ranged between 7.5-23.5%, FGA ranged between 1.31-4.15 points, and GS ranged between 0.07 m/s-0.22 m/s.

CONCLUSIONS

The anchor-based calculations of the MCID of 18.1%, 4 points, and 0.09 m/s for ABC, FGA, and GS respectively for IVD should be used over distribution-based calculations. This is due to strength of DHI as the anchor and statistical analysis. VRT and researches can use these values to indicate meaningful changes in gait and balance function in IVD.

Case-finding and improving patient outcomes for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care: the BLISS research programme including cluster RCT

Background

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is a major contributor to morbidity, mortality and health service costs but is vastly underdiagnosed. Evidence on screening and how best to approach this is not clear. There are also uncertainties around the natural history (prognosis) of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and how it impacts on work performance.

Objectives

Work package 1: to evaluate alternative methods of screening for undiagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care, with clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness analyses and an economic model of a routine screening programme. Work package 2: to recruit a primary care chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohort, develop a prognostic model [Birmingham Lung Improvement StudieS (BLISS)] to predict risk of respiratory hospital admissions, validate an existing model to predict mortality risk, address some uncertainties about natural history and explore the potential for a home exercise intervention. Work package 3: to identify which factors are associated with employment, absenteeism, presenteeism (working while unwell) and evaluate the feasibility of offering formal occupational health assessment to improve work performance.

Design

Work package 1: a cluster randomised controlled trial with household-level randomised comparison of two alternative case-finding approaches in the intervention arm. Work package 2: cohort study – focus groups. Work package 3: subcohort – feasibility study.

Setting

Primary care settings in West Midlands, UK.

Participants

Work package 1: 74,818 people who have smoked aged 40–79 years without a previous chronic obstructive pulmonary disease diagnosis from 54 general practices. Work package 2: 741 patients with previously diagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease from 71 practices and participants from the work package 1 randomised controlled trial. Twenty-six patients took part in focus groups. Work package 3: occupational subcohort with 248 patients in paid employment at baseline. Thirty-five patients took part in an occupational health intervention feasibility study.

Interventions

Work package 1: targeted case-finding – symptom screening questionnaire, administered opportunistically or additionally by post, followed by diagnostic post-bronchodilator spirometry. The comparator was routine care. Work package 2: twenty-three candidate variables selected from literature and expert reviews. Work package 3: sociodemographic, clinical and occupational characteristics; occupational health assessment and recommendations.

Main outcome measures

Work package 1: yield (screen-detected chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and cost-effectiveness of case-finding; effectiveness of screening on respiratory hospitalisation and mortality after approximately 4 years. Work package 2: respiratory hospitalisation within 2 years, and barriers to and facilitators of physical activity. Work package 3: work performance – feasibility and acceptability of the occupational health intervention and study processes.

Results

Work package 1: targeted case-finding resulted in greater yield of previously undiagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease than routine care at 1 year [n = 1278 (4%) vs. n = 337 (1%), respectively; adjusted odds ratio 7.45, 95% confidence interval 4.80 to 11.55], and a model-based estimate of a regular screening programme suggested an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £16,596 per additional quality-adjusted life-year gained. However, long-term follow-up of the trial showed that at ≈4 years there was no clear evidence that case-finding, compared with routine practice, was effective in reducing respiratory admissions (adjusted hazard ratio 1.04, 95% confidence interval 0.73 to1.47) or mortality (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.61). Work package 2: 2305 patients, comprising 1564 with previously diagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and 741 work package 1 participants (330 with and 411 without obstruction), were recruited. The BLISS prognostic model among cohort participants with confirmed airflow obstruction (n = 1894) included 6 of 23 candidate variables (i.e. age, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test score, 12-month respiratory admissions, body mass index, diabetes and forced expiratory volume in 1 second percentage predicted). After internal validation and adjustment (uniform shrinkage factor 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 1.02), the model discriminated well in predicting 2-year respiratory hospital admissions (c-statistic 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.72 to 0.79). In focus groups, physical activity engagement was related to self-efficacy and symptom severity. Work package 3: in the occupational subcohort, increasing dyspnoea and exposure to inhaled irritants were associated with lower work productivity at baseline. Longitudinally, increasing exacerbations and worsening symptoms, but not a decline in airflow obstruction, were associated with absenteeism and presenteeism. The acceptability of the occupational health intervention was low, leading to low uptake and low implementation of recommendations and making a full trial unfeasible.

Limitations

Work package 1: even with the most intensive approach, only 38% of patients responded to the case-finding invitation. Management of case-found patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care was generally poor, limiting interpretation of the long-term effectiveness of case-finding on clinical outcomes. Work package 2: the components of the BLISS model may not always be routinely available and calculation of the score requires a computerised system. Work package 3: relatively few cohort participants were in paid employment at baseline, limiting the interpretation of predictors of lower work productivity.

Conclusions

This programme has addressed some of the major uncertainties around screening for undiagnosed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and has resulted in the development of a novel, accurate model for predicting respiratory hospitalisation in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and the inception of a primary care chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohort for longer-term follow-up. We have also identified factors that may affect work productivity in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease as potential targets for future intervention.

Future work

We plan to obtain data for longer-term follow-up of trial participants at 10 years. The BLISS model needs to be externally validated. Our primary care chronic obstructive pulmonary disease cohort is a unique resource for addressing further questions to better understand the prognosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14930255.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 9, No. 13. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Psychometric properties of patient reported outcome measures in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis

BACKGROUND

Various patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). We aimed to describe their psychometric properties, assess their relationship with 1-year mortality and determine their minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs).

METHODS

In a prospective multicentre study, participants with IPF completed the King's Brief Interstitial Lung Disease Questionnaire (K-BILD), the modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) dyspnoea scale, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and University of California, San Diego shortness of breath questionnaire (UCSD-SOBQ) three-monthly intervals over a 12-month period. Forced vital capacity (FVC) was matched with questionnaires and mortality was captured. Anchor- and distribution-based methods were used to derive MCID.

RESULTS

Data were available from 238 participants. All PROMs had good internal consistency and high degree of correlations with other tools (except UCSD-SOBQ correlated poorly with FVC). There were significant associations with mortality for K-BILD (hazard ratio 16.67; 95% CI 2.38-100) and SGRQ (hazard ratio 4.65; 95% CI 1.32-16.62) but not with the other PROMs or FVC. The median MCID (range) for K-BILD was 6.3 (4.1-7.0), SGRQ was 7.0 (3.8-9.6), mMRC was 0.4 (0.1-0.5) and UCSD-SOBQ was 9.6 (4.1-14.2).

CONCLUSIONS

The K-BILD was related to other severity measures and had the strongest relationship with mortality.

Effectiveness of a Three-Week Inpatient Pulmonary Rehabilitation Program for Patients after COVID-19: A Prospective Observational Study

For COVID-19 patients who remain symptomatic after the acute phase, pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is recommended. However, only a few studies have investigated the effectiveness of PR, especially considering the duration between the acute phase of COVID-19 and the onset of rehabilitation, as well as the initial severity. This prospective observational study evaluated the efficacy of PR in patients after COVID-19. A total of 120 still-symptomatic patients referred for PR after overcoming acute COVID-19 were asked to participate, of whom 108 (mean age 55.6 ± 10.1 years, 45.4% female) consented. The patients were assigned to three groups according to the time of referral and initial disease severity (severe acute; severe after interval; mild after interval). The primary outcome was dyspnea. Secondary outcomes included other respiratory disease symptoms, physical capacity, lung function, fatigue, quality of life (QoL), depression, and anxiety. Furthermore, patients rated the overall effectiveness of PR and their subjective change in health status. At the end of PR, we detected improvements with large effect sizes in exertional dyspnea, physical capacity, QoL, fatigue, and depression in the overall group. Other parameters changed with small to medium effect sizes. PR was effective after acute COVID-19 in all three groups analyzed.

Minimal Clinically Important Differences for Measures of Pain, Lung Function, Fatigue, and Functionality in Spinal Cord Injury

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for the numerical pain rating scale (NPRS), peak cough flow (PCF), peak expiratory flow (PEF), fatigue severity scale (FSS), and London chest activities of daily living scale (LCADL) in patients with spinal cord injuries (SCIs) after rehabilitation.

METHODS

Inpatients with SCI from 2 rehabilitation centers participating in a daily rehabilitation program were recruited. The NPRS, PCF, PEF, FSS, and LCADL were collected at baseline and discharge. The global rating of change scale was performed at discharge. MCIDs were calculated using anchor (linear regression, mean change, and receiver operating characteristic curves) and distribution-based methods (0.5 times the baseline SD, standard error of measurement, 1.96 times standard error of measurement, and minimal detectable change) and pooled using arithmetic weighted mean.

RESULTS

Sixty inpatients with SCI (36 males; 54.5 [15.9] years) participated. On average their rehabilitation program lasted 7.3 (1.7) weeks. Pooled MCID estimates were 1.6 points for the NPRS, 69.8 L/min for the PCF, 77.4 L/min for the PEF, 1.1 points for the FSS, and 1.4 points for the LCADL.

CONCLUSION

Established MCIDs for NPRS, PCF, PEF, FSS, and LCADL will help health professionals to interpret results and guide rehabilitation interventions in patients with SCI.

IMPACT

Health professionals and researchers may now use -1.6 points for the NPRS, 69.8 L/min for the PCF, 77.4 L/min for the PEF, 1.1 points for the FSS, and 1.4 points for the LCADL to interpret if changes in pain, cough intensity, expiratory flow, fatigue and activities of daily living after rehabilitation of patients with SCI have been clinically relevant.

Effect of Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients with Asthma COPD Overlap Syndrome: A Randomized Control Trial

Objectives

We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of six weeks pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in patients with asthma-chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) overlap syndrome (ACOS).

Methods

We enrolled 28 patients with ACOS. Fourteen patients were randomly allocated to the PR group, which comprised of supervised endurance training, supervised resistance training, breathing exercises, self management, and education. The other 14 patients were allocated to the control group, who were asked to continue their usual routine strategies for six weeks. All patients were assessed at baseline and after six weeks using the six minute walk test (6MWT), St George Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), pulmonary function test (PFT), and Bode index (BI).

Results

We saw a significant improvement in 6MWT (p = 0.001), SGRQ (p = 0.007), and BI (p < 0.001) in the PR group after six weeks compared to the control group. There was no significant difference between the groups for PFT (p = 0.182) after six weeks.

Conclusions

Use of a short-term PR program in ACOS patients results in favorable changes in functional capacity, health-related quality of life, and BI. However, short-term PR was not sufficient to register changes in pulmonary function in these patients.

Validity of EQ-5D utility index and minimal clinically important difference estimation among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Background

The discriminatory ability of multi-attribute utility (MAU) measures compared to condition-specific measures (CSM) in assessing health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is an unsettled issue. This study investigated the quality of life of patients with COPD with three different HRQoL instruments and examined whether they could differentiate between adjacent severity groups in a statistically and clinically meaningful manner. In the process, the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) of the EQ-5D utility index were estimated.

Methods

Cross-sectional survey data were collected from patients with mild to very severe COPD in South Korea. In addition to demographic and clinical information, the following HRQoL questionnaires were used: The three-level five-dimensional Euro-Quality of Life tool (EQ-5D-3L), the EQ-Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS), and the Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Assessment Test (CAT). Patients’ health-related quality of life was analyzed with reference to severity groups based on the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) classification. To investigate the discriminatory ability of the HRQoL instruments between COPD severity groups, tests examining variance, covariance, and standardized mean difference were performed. After estimating the MCID of the EQ-5D utility index using the anchor-based method, we investigated whether the differences in the EQ-5D utility scores between groups exceeded the clinically meaningful minimum level.

Results

A total of 298 patients completed this study. All the quality of life scores showed statistically significant differences between the GOLD severity groups. The pooled MCID estimate for the EQ-5D utility index was 0.028 (range: 0.017–0.033). Even after adjusting for other factors affecting quality of life, the EQ-5D utility index differentiated the GOLD groups well.

Conclusions

We conclude that the EQ-5D utility index is a valid instrument for measuring the quality of life of patients with COPD, and the pooled MCID estimate for the EQ-5D utility index was 0.028.

Minimal Clinically Important Differences for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Fatigue in Patients With COPD Following Pulmonary Rehabilitation

BACKGROUND

Fatigue is a burdensome and prevailing symptom in patients with COPD. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) improves fatigue; however, interpreting when such improvement is clinically relevant is challenging. Minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for instruments assessing fatigue are warranted to better tailor PR and guide clinical decisions.

RESEARCH QUESTION

This study estimated MCIDs for the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue Subscale (FACIT-FS), the modified FACIT-FS, and the Checklist Individual Strength-Fatigue Subscale in patients with COPD following PR.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

Data from patients with COPD who completed a 12-week community-based PR program were used to compute the MCIDs. The pooled MCID was estimated by calculating the arithmetic weighted mean, resulting from the combination of anchor-based (weight, two-thirds) and distribution-based (weight, one-third) methods. Anchors were patients' and physiotherapists' Global Rating of Change Scale, COPD Assessment Test, St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ), and exacerbations. To estimate MCIDs, we used mean change, receiver-operating characteristic curves, and linear regression analysis for anchor-based approaches, and 0.5 × SD, SE of measurement, 1.96 × SE of measurement, and minimal detectable change for distribution-based approaches.

RESULTS

Fifty-three patients with COPD (79% male, 68.4 ± 7.6 years of age, and FEV₁ 48.7 ± 17.4% predicted) were included in the analysis. Exacerbations and the SGRQ-impact and the SGRQ-total scores fulfilled the requirements to be used as anchors. Pooled MCIDs were 4.7 for FACIT-FS, 3.8 for the modified FACIT-FS, and 9.3 for the Checklist Individual Strength-Fatigue Subscale.

INTRPRETATION

The MCIDs proposed in this study can be used by different stakeholders to interpret PR effectiveness.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03799666; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Minimal Clinically Important Differences for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Cough and Sputum in Patients with COPD

Background

Cough and sputum are highly prevalent in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has shown to be effective in managing these symptoms. However, the interpretation of the magnitude of PR effects is hindered by the lack of minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs).

Purpose

This study established MCIDs for the Leicester cough questionnaire (LCQ) and the cough and sputum assessment questionnaire (CASA-Q), in patients with COPD after PR.

Patients and Methods

An observational prospective study was conducted in patients with COPD who participated in a 12-weeks community-based PR program. Anchor- (mean change, receiver operating characteristic curves and linear regression analysis) and distribution-based methods [0.5*standard deviation; standard error of measurement (SEM); 1.96*SEM; minimal detectable change and effect size] were used to compute the MCIDs. The anchors used were: i) patients and physiotherapists global rating of change scale, ii) COPD assessment test, iii) St. George's respiratory questionnaire and iv) occurrence of an exacerbation during PR. Pooled MCIDs were computed using the arithmetic weighted mean (2/3 for anchor- and 1/3 for distribution-based methods).

Results

Forty-nine patients with COPD (81.6% male, 69.8±7.4years, FEV150.4±19.4%predicted) were used in the analysis. The pooled MCIDs were 1.3 for LCQ and for CASA-Q domains were: 10.6 - cough symptoms; 10.1 - cough impact; 9.5 - sputum symptoms and 7.8 - sputum impact.

Conclusion

The MCIDs found in this study are potential estimates to interpret PR effects on cough and sputum, and may contribute to guide interventions.

Responsiveness of PROMIS® to change in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive chronic disease characterized by airflow obstruction that leads to shortness of breath and substantial negative impacts on health-related quality of life (HRQL). The course of COPD includes periodic acute exacerbations that require changes in treatment and/or hospitalizations. This study was designed to examine the responsiveness of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) measures to changes associated with COPD exacerbation recovery.

METHODS

A longitudinal analysis using mixed-effects models was conducted of people who were enrolled while stable (n = 100) and those who experienced an acute exacerbation (n = 85). PROMIS (physical function, pain interference, pain behavior, fatigue, anxiety, depression, anger, social roles, discretionary social activities, Global Health, dyspnea severity and dyspnea functional limitations) and COPD-targeted HRQL measures were completed at baseline and at 12 weeks.

RESULTS

We administered PROMIS measures using computer adaptive testing (CAT), followed by administration of any remaining short form (SF) items that had not yet been administered by CAT. Examination of the difference between group differences from baseline to 12 weeks in the stable and exacerbation groups revealed that the exacerbation group changed (improved) significantly more than the stable group in anxiety (p < .001 to p < .01; f2 effect size [ES] = 0.023/0.021), fatigue (p < .0001; ES = 0.036/0.047) and social roles (p < .001 to p < .05; ES = 0.035/0.024). All effect sizes were small in magnitude and smaller than hypothesized. Depression was also statistically significant (p < .05, SF only) but the ES was trivial. For all other PROMIS domains, the differences were not significant and ES were trivial.

CONCLUSIONS

This longitudinal study provides some support for the validity of the PROMIS fatigue, anxiety, and social roles domains in COPD, but further evaluation of responsiveness is warranted.

Impact of Disease-Specific Fears on Pulmonary Rehabilitation Trajectories in Patients with COPD

Disease-specific fears predict health status in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), but their role in pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) remains poorly understood and especially longer-term evaluations are lacking. We therefore investigated changes in disease-specific fears over the course of PR and six months after PR, and investigated associations with PR outcomes (COPD assessment test (CAT) and St. Georges respiratory questionnaire (SGRQ)) in a subset of patients with COPD (n = 146) undergoing a 3-week inpatient PR program as part of the STAR study (Clinicaltrials.gov, ID: NCT02966561). Disease-specific fears as measured with the COPD anxiety questionnaire improved after PR. For fear of dyspnea, fear of physical activity and fear of disease progression, improvements remained significant at six-month follow-up. Patients with higher disease-specific fears at baseline showed elevated symptom burden (CAT and SGRQ Symptom scores), which persisted after PR and at follow-up. Elevated disease-specific fears also resulted in reduced improvements in Quality of Life (SGRQ activity and impact scales) after PR and at follow-up. Finally, improvement in disease-specific fears was associated with improvement in symptom burden and quality of life. Adjustment for potential confounding variables (sex, smoking status, age, lung function, and depressive symptoms) resulted in comparable effects. These findings show the role of disease-specific fears in patients with COPD during PR and highlight the need to target disease-specific fears to further improve the effects of PR.

Baseline health status and setting impacted minimal clinically important differences in COPD: an exploratory study

OBJECTIVES

Minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) are used as fixed numbers in the interpretation of clinical trials. Little is known about its dynamics. This study aims to explore the impact of baseline score, study setting, and patient characteristics on health status MCIDs in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Baseline and follow-up data on the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ), and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) were retrospectively analyzed from pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) and routine clinical practice (RCP). Anchor- and distribution-based MCID estimates were calculated and tested between settings, gender, age, Global initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) classification, comorbidities, and baseline health status.

RESULTS

In total, 658 patients were included with 2,299 change score measurements. MCID estimates for improvement and deterioration ranged for all subgroups 0.50-6.30 (CAT), 0.10-0.84 (CCQ), and 0.33-12.86 (SGRQ). Larger MCID estimates for improvement and smaller ones for deterioration were noted in patients with worse baseline health status, females, elderly, GOLD I/II patients, and patients with less comorbidities. Estimates from PR were larger.

CONCLUSION

Baseline health status and setting affected MCID estimates of COPD health status questionnaires. Patterns were observed for gender, age, spirometry classification, and comorbidity levels. These outcomes would advocate the need for tailored MCIDs.

Effects of use of an eHealth platform e-Vita for COPD patients on disease specific quality of life domains

BACKGROUND

Integrated disease management with self-management for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is effective to improve clinical outcomes. eHealth can improve patients' involvement to be able to accept and maintain a healthier lifestyle. Eventhough there is mixed evidence of the impact of eHealth on quality of life (QoL) in different settings.

AIM

The primary aim of the e-Vita-COPD-study was to investigate the effect of use of eHealth patient platforms on disease specific QoL of COPD patients.

METHODS

We evaluated the impact of an eHealth platform on disease specific QoL measured with the clinical COPD questionnaire (CCQ), including subscales of symptoms, functional state and mental state. Interrupted time series (ITS) design was used to collect CCQ data at multiple time points. Multilevel linear regression modelling was used to compare trends in CCQ before and after the intervention.

RESULTS

Of 742 invited COPD patients, 244 signed informed consent. For the analyses, we only included patients who actually used the eHealth platform (n = 123). The decrease of CCQ-symptoms was 0.20% before the intervention and 0.27% after the intervention; this difference in slopes was statistically significant (P = 0.027). The decrease of CCQ-mental was 0.97% before the intervention and after the intervention there was an increase of 0.017%; this difference was statistically significant (P = 0.01). No significant difference was found in the slopes of CCQ (P = 0.12) and CCQ-function (P = 0.11) before and after the intervention.

CONCLUSION

The e-Vita eHealth platform had a potential beneficial impact on the CCQ-symptoms of COPD patients, but not on functional state. The CCQ-mental state remained stable after the intervention, but this was a deterioration compared to the improving situation before the start of the eHealth platform. Therefore, health care providers should be aware that, although symptoms improve, there might be a slight increase in anxiety and depression after introducing an eHealth intervention to support self-management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Our study is registered in the Dutch Trial Register (national registration of clinical trails, mandatory for publication) with number NTR4098 and can be found at http://www.trialregister.nl/trial/3936 . Date registered: 2013-07-31. First participant: 2014-01-01.

Thresholds for clinically important deterioration versus improvement in COPD health status: results from a randomised controlled trial in pulmonary rehabilitation and an observational study during routine clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a progressive disease. Preventing deterioration of health status is therefore an important therapy goal. (Minimal) Clinically Important Differences ((M)CIDs) are used to interpret changes observed. It remains unclear whether (M)CIDs are similar for both deterioration and improvement in health status. This study investigates and compares these clinical thresholds for three widely-used questionnaires.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Data were retrospectively analysed from an inhouse 3-week pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) randomised controlled trial in the German Klinik Bad Reichenhall (study 1), and observational research in Dutch primary and secondary routine clinical practice (RCP) (study 2).

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with COPD aged ≥18 years (study 1) and aged ≥40 years (study 2) without respiratory comorbidities were included for analysis.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

The COPD Assessment Test (CAT), Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) were completed at baseline and at 3, 6 and 12 months. A Global Rating of Change scale was added at follow-up. Anchor-based and distribution-based methods were used to determine clinically relevant thresholds.

RESULTS

In total, 451 patients were included from PR and 207 from RCP. MCIDs for deterioration ranged from 1.30 to 4.21 (CAT), from 0.19 to 0.66 (CCQ), and from 2.75 to 7.53 (SGRQ). MCIDs for improvement ranged from -3.78 to -1.53 (CAT), from -0.50 to -0.19 (CCQ), and from -9.20 to -2.76 (SGRQ). Thresholds for moderate improvement versus deterioration ranged from -5.02 to -3.29 vs 3.89 to 8.14 (CAT), from -0.90 to -0.72 vs 0.42 to 1.23 (CCQ), and from -15.85 to -13.63 vs 7.46 to 9.30 (SGRQ).

CONCLUSIONS

MCID ranges for improvement and deterioration on the CAT, CCQ and SGRQ were somewhat similar. However, estimates for moderate and large change varied and were inconsistent. Thresholds differed between study settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Routine Inspiratory Muscle Training within COPD Rehabilitation trial: #DRKS00004609; MCID study: #UMCG201500447.

An observational cohort study of exercise and education for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease not meeting criteria for formal pulmonary rehabilitation programmes

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is offered to patients with functional breathlessness. However, access to PR is limited. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether a 4-week education and exercise programme offered to COPD patients with Medical Research Council (MRC) dyspnoea 1-2 improves disease self-management. Patients were recruited by their GP to attend four weekly 2-h sessions provided by a multidisciplinary team. Patients completed outcome measures before and after the program. Forty-two patients entered the programme and 26 out of 42 (61.9%) completed all sessions. The Bristol COPD Knowledge Questionnaire and Patient Activation Measure improved (both p ≤ 0.001). Disease burden was not reduced according to the COPD assessment test. All patients accepted a referral for ongoing exercise. Fourteen current smokers (81.3%) accepted a referral for smoking cessation, three patients with anxiety or depression (37.5%) accepted a psychological therapies referral. The programme improved COPD disease knowledge, patient activation and stimulated referrals to further services supporting disease management. Randomised controlled trials are warranted for similar interventions for COPD patients with early stage disease.

The impact of integrated disease management in high-risk COPD patients in primary care

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have a reduced quality of life (QoL) and exacerbations that drive health service utilization (HSU). A majority of patients with COPD are managed in primary care. Our objective was to evaluate an integrated disease management, self-management, and structured follow-up intervention (IDM) for high-risk patients with COPD in primary care. This was a one-year multi-center randomized controlled trial. High-risk, exacerbation-prone COPD patients were randomized to IDM provided by a certified respiratory educator and physician, or usual physician care. IDM received case management, self-management education, and skills training. The primary outcome, COPD-related QoL, was measured using the COPD Assessment Test (CAT). Of 180 patients randomized from 8 sites, 81.1% completed the study. Patients were 53.6% women, mean age 68.2 years, post-bronchodilator FEV1 52.8% predicted, and 77.4% were Global Initiative for Obstructive Lung Disease Stage D. QoL-CAT scores improved in IDM patients, 22.6 to 14.8, and worsened in usual care, 19.3 to 22.0, adjusted difference 9.3 (p < 0.001). Secondary outcomes including the Clinical COPD Questionnaire, Bristol Knowledge Questionnaire, and FEV1 demonstrated differential improvements in favor of IDM of 1.29 (p < 0.001), 29.6% (p < 0.001), and 100 mL, respectively (p = 0.016). Compared to usual care, significantly fewer IDM patients had a severe exacerbation, -48.9% (p < 0.001), required an urgent primary care visit for COPD, -30.2% (p < 0.001), or had an emergency department visit, -23.6% (p = 0.001). We conclude that IDM self-management and structured follow-up substantially improved QoL, knowledge, FEV1, reduced severe exacerbations, and HSU, in a high-risk primary care COPD population. Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02343055.

Functional status measures for the COPD patient: A practical categorization

The objective of this study is to review available functional status measures (FSMs) validated for use in the chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) population and categorizing the measures by their commonalities to formulate a framework that supports clinicians in the selection and application of FSMs. A literature review identifying valid and reliable measures of functional status for people with COPD was undertaken. Measures were thematically analyzed and categorized to develop a framework for clinical application. A variety of measures of activity levels exist, with 35 included in this review. Thematic categorization identified five categories of measures: daily activity, impact, surrogate, performance-based, and disability-based measures. The vast variety of FSMs available for clinicians to apply with people who have COPD may be overwhelming, and selection must be thoughtfully based on the nature of the population being studied/evaluated, and aims of evaluation being conducted, not simply as a standard measure used at the institution. Psychometric testing is a critical feature to a strong instrument and issues of reliability, validity, and responsiveness need to be understood prior to measurement use. Contextual nature of measures such as language used and activities measured is also important. A categorical framework to support clinicians in the selection and application of FSMs has been presented in this article.

Minimal Important and Detectable Differences of Respiratory Measures in Outpatients with AECOPD†

Interpreting clinical changes during acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is challenging due to the absence of established minimal detectable (MDD) and important (MID) differences for most respiratory measures. This study established MDD and MID for respiratory measures in outpatients with AECOPD following pharmacological treatment. COPD assessment test (CAT), modified Borg scale (MBS), modified British Medical Research Council (mMRC) questionnaire, peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO₂), computerised respiratory sounds and forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV₁) were collected within 24-48 hour of an AECOPD and after 45 days of pharmacological treatment. MID and MDD were calculated using anchor- (receiver operating characteristic and linear regression analysis) and distribution-based methods (effect size, SEM, 0.5*SD and MDC95) and pooled using Meta XL. Forty-four outpatients with AECOPD (31♂; 68.2 ± 9.1 years; FEV₁ 51.1 ± 20.3%predicted) participated. Significant correlations with CAT were found for the MBS (r = 0.34), mMRC (r = 0.39) and FEV₁ (r = 0.33), resulting in MIDs of 0.8, 0.5-0.6 and 0.03L, respectively. MDD of 0.5-1.4 (MBS), 0.4-1.2 (mMRC), 0.10-0.28L (FEV₁), 3.6-10.1% (FEV₁%predicted), 0.9-2.4% (SpO₂), 0.7-1.9 (number of inspiratory crackles), 1.1-4.5 (number of expiratory crackles), 7.1-25.8% (inspiratory wheeze rate) and 11.8-63.0% (expiratory wheeze rate) were found. Pooled data of MID/MDD showed that improvements of 0.9 for the MBS, 0.6 for the mMRC, 0.15L for the FEV₁, 7.6% for the FEV₁%predicted, 1.5% for the SpO₂, 1.1 for the inspiratory and 2.4 for the number of expiratory number of crackles, 14.1% for the inspiratory and 32.5% for the expiratory wheeze rate are meaningful following an AECOPD managed with pharmacological treatment on an outpatient basis.

Influence of comorbid heart disease on dyspnea and health status in patients with COPD - a cohort study

Purpose

The aim of this study was to examine the changing influence over time of comorbid heart disease on symptoms and health status in patients with COPD.

Patients and methods

This is a prospective cohort study of 495 COPD patients with a baseline in 2005 and follow-up in 2012. The study population was divided into three groups: patients without heart disease (no-HD), those diagnosed with heart disease during the study period (new-HD) and those with heart disease at baseline (HD). Symptoms were measured using the mMRC. Health status was measured using the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) and the COPD Assessment Test (CAT; only available in 2012). Logistic regression with mMRC ≥2 and linear regression with CCQ and CAT scores in 2012 as dependent variables were performed unadjusted, adjusted for potential confounders, and additionally adjusted for baseline mMRC, respectively, CCQ scores.

Results

Mean mMRC worsened from 2005 to 2012 as follows: for the no-HD group from 1.8 (±1.3) to 2.0 (±1.4), (P=0.003), for new-HD from 2.2 (±1.3) to 2.4 (±1.4), (P=0.16), and for HD from 2.2 (±1.3) to 2.5 (±1.4), (P=0.03). In logistic regression adjusted for potential confounding factors, HD (OR 1.71; 95% CI: 1.03-2.86) was associated with mMRC ≥2. Health status worsened from mean CCQ as follows: for no-HD from 1.9 (±1.2) to 2.1 (±1.3) with (P=0.01), for new-HD from 2.3 (±1.5) to 2.6 (±1.6) with (P=0.07), and for HD from 2.4 (±1.1) to 2.5 (±1.2) with (P=0.57). In linear regression adjusted for potential confounders, HD (regression coefficient 0.12; 95% CI: 0.04-5.91) and new-HD (0.15; 0.89-5.92) were associated with higher CAT scores. In CCQ functional state domain, new-HD (0.14; 0.18-1.16) and HD (0.12; 0.04-0.92) were associated with higher scores. After additional correction for baseline mMRC and CCQ, no statistically significant associations were found.

Conclusion

Heart disease contributes to lower health status and higher symptom burden in COPD but does not accelerate the worsening over time.

Active mind-body movement therapies as an adjunct to or in comparison with pulmonary rehabilitation for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Active mind-body movement therapies (AMBMTs), including but not limited to yoga, tai chi, and qigong, have been applied as exercise modalities for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). AMBMT strategies have been found to be more effective than usual care; however, whether AMBMT is inferior, equivalent, or superior to pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in people with COPD remains to be determined.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of AMBMTs compared with, or in addition to, PR in the management of COPD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Specialised Register of trials and major Chinese databases, as well as trial registries from inception to July 2017. In addition, we searched references of primary studies and review articles. We updated this search in July 2018 but have not yet incorporated these results.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included (1) randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing AMBMT (i.e. controlled breathing and/or focused meditation/attention interventions for which patients must actively move their joints and muscles for at least four weeks with no minimum intervention frequency) versus PR (any inpatient or outpatient, community-based or home-based rehabilitation programme lasting at least four weeks, with no minimum intervention frequency, that included conventional exercise training with or without education or psychological support) and (2) RCTs comparing AMBMT + PR versus PR alone in people with COPD. Two independent review authors screened and selected studies for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion, extracted outcome data, and assessed risk of bias. We contacted study authors if necessary to ask them to provide missing data. We calculated mean differences (MDs) using a random-effects model.

MAIN RESULTS

We included in the meta-analysis 10 studies with 762 participants across one or more comparisons. The sample size of included studies ranged from 11 to 206 participants. Nine out of 10 studies involving all levels of COPD severity were conducted in China with adults from 55 to 88 years of age, a higher proportion of whom were male (78%). Nine out of 10 studies provided tai chi and/or qigong programmes as AMBMT, and one study provided yoga. Overall, the term 'PR' has been uncritically applied in the vast majority of studies, which limits comparison of AMBMT and PR. For example, eight out of 10 studies considered walking training as equal to PR and used this as conventional exercise training within PR. Overall study quality for main comparisons was moderate to very low mainly owing to imprecision, indirectness (exercise component inconsistent with recommendations), and risk of bias issues. The primary outcomes for our review were quality of life, dyspnoea, and serious adverse events.When researchers compared AMBMT versus PR alone (mainly unstructured walking training), statistically significant improvements in disease-specific quality of life (QoL) (St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score) favoured AMBMT: mean difference (MD) -5.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) -8.75 to -2.92; three trials; 249 participants; low-quality evidence. The common effect size, but not the 95% CI around the pooled treatment effect, exceeded the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of minus four. The COPD Assessment Test (CAT) also revealed statistically significant improvements favouring AMBMT over PR, with scores exceeding the MCID of three, with an MD of 6.58 units (95% CI -9.16 to - 4.00 units; one trial; 74 participants; low-quality evidence). Results show no between-group differences with regard to dyspnoea measured by the modified Medical Research Council Scale (MD 0.00 units, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.37; two trials; 127 participants; low-quality evidence), the Borg Scale (MD 0.44 units, 95% CI -0.88 to 0.00; one trial; 139 participants; low-quality evidence), or the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) Dyspnoea Scale (MD -0.21, 95% CI -2.81 to 2.38; one trial; 11 participants; low-quality evidence). Comparisons of AMBMT versus PR alone did not include assessments of generic quality of life, adverse events, limb muscle function, exacerbations, or adherence.Comparisons of AMBMT added to PR versus PR alone (mainly unstructured walking training) revealed significant improvements in generic QoL as measured by Short Form (SF)-36 for both the SF-36 general health summary score (MD 5.42, 95% CI 3.82 to 7.02; one trial; 80 participants; very low-quality evidence) and the SF-36 mental health summary score (MD 3.29, 95% CI 1.45 to 4.95; one trial; 80 participants; very low-quality evidence). With regard to disease-specific QoL, investigators noted no significant improvement with addition of AMBMT to PR versus PR alone (SGRQ total score: MD -2.57, 95% CI -7.76 to 2.62 units; one trial; 192 participants; moderate-quality evidence; CRQ Dyspnoea Scale score: MD 0.04, 95% CI -2.18 to 2.26 units; one trial; 80 participants; very low-quality evidence). Comparisons of AMBMT + PR versus PR alone did not include assessments of dyspnoea, adverse events, limb muscle function, exacerbations, or adherence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the quality of available evidence, the effects of AMBMT versus PR or of AMBMT added to PR versus PR alone in people with stable COPD remain inconclusive. Evidence of low quality suggests better disease-specific QoL with AMBMT versus PR in people with stable COPD, and evidence of very low quality suggests no differences in dyspnoea between AMBMT and PR. Evidence of moderate quality shows that AMBMT added to PR does not result in improved disease-specific QoL, and evidence of very low quality suggests that AMBMT added to PR may lead to better generic QoL versus PR alone. Future studies with adequate descriptions of conventional exercise training (i.e. information on duration, intensity, and progression) delivered by trained professionals with a comprehensive understanding of respiratory physiology, exercise science, and the pathology of COPD are needed before definitive conclusions can be drawn regarding treatment outcomes with AMBMT versus PR or AMBMT added to PR versus PR alone for patients with COPD.

Comparative efficacy of inhaled medications (ICS/LABA, LAMA, LAMA/LABA and SAMA) for COPD: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To assess the comparative efficacy of short-acting muscarinic antagonists (SAMAs), long-acting muscarinic antagonists (LAMAs), LAMA in combination with long-acting beta-agonists (LABAs; LAMA/LABAs) and inhaled corticosteroids (ICS) in combination with LABA (ICS/LABAs) for the maintenance treatment of COPD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically reviewed 74 randomized controlled trials (74,832 participants) published up to 15 November 2017, which compared any of the interventions (SAMA [ipratropium], LAMA [aclidinium, glycopyrronium, tiotropium, umeclidinium], LAMA/LABA [aclidinium/formoterol, indacaterol/glycopyrronium, tiotropium/olodaterol, umeclidinium/vilanterol] and ICS/LABA [fluticasone/vilanterol, budesonide/formoterol, salmeterol/fluticasone]) with each other or with placebo. A random-effects network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect evidence was conducted to examine the change from baseline in trough FEV1, transition dyspnea index, St George's Respiratory Questionnaire and frequency of adverse events at weeks 12 and 24.

RESULTS

Inconsistency models were not statistically significant for all outcomes. LAMAs, LAMA/LABAs and ICS/LABAs led to a significantly greater improvement in trough FEV1 compared with placebo and SAMA monotherapy at weeks 12 and 24. All LAMA/LABAs, except aclidinium/formoterol, were statistically significantly better than LAMA monotherapy and ICS/LABAs in improving trough FEV1. Among the LAMAs, umeclidinium showed statistically significant improvement in trough FEV1 at week 12 compared to tiotropium and glycopyrronium, but the results were not clinically significant. LAMA/LABAs had the highest probabilities of being ranked the best agents in FEV1 improvement. Similar trends were observed for the transition dyspnea index and St George's Respiratory Questionnaire outcomes. There were no significant differences in the incidences of adverse events among all treatment options.

CONCLUSION

LAMA/LABA showed the greatest improvement in trough FEV1 at weeks 12 and 24 compared with the other inhaled drug classes, while SAMA showed the least improvement. There were no significant differences among the LAMAs and LAMA/LABAs within their respective classes.

The role of CAT in evaluating the response to treatment of patients with AECOPD

Background

The chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) Assessment Test (CAT) questionnaire is a short patient-completed questionnaire, which is used to assess the health status of patients with stable COPD. However, whether it is a good tool to evaluate the response to treatment in acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) has been less studied.

Methods

The patients were assessed at two visits, at admission and on the seventh day. Anthropometric variables were collected at admission. CAT and lung function were measured twice at the above time points. At the second visit, the health status of the patients were divided into five groups based on a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from 1 to 5, which represents "much better," "slightly better," "no change," "slightly worse," and "much worse." Responders were those who reported "much better" or "slightly better," and nonresponders were those who claimed "no change," "worse," or "much worse."

Results

In total, 225 patients were recruited. The average CAT score at admission was 24.82±7.41, which declined to 17.41±7.35 on the seventh day. There were 81.33% responders, whose improvement in CAT score (9.37±5.24) was much higher than that of the nonresponders (-1.36±4.35). A moderate correlation was observed between the changes in CAT score and improvement in FEV1, FEV1%, and the length of hospital stay. There was a strong correlation between the changes in CAT score and health status. A 3.5-unit improvement in the CAT score, with highest area under the curve, was the cutoff to differentiate responders from nonresponders.

Conclusion

The evolution of CAT scores during exacerbation can provide useful information to assess the health status of patients with AECOPD. A 3.5-unit improvement in CAT score is the best cutoff to differentiate between patients who have a response or no response to treatment, which offers a convenient and easy way for clinicians to monitor the health status of patients with an AECOPD.

Clinically relevant differences in COPD health status: systematic review and triangulation

The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) quantifies when measured differences can be considered clinically relevant. This study aims to review and triangulate MCIDs of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) health status tools.A systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library was conducted (Prospero #CRD42015023221). Study details, patient characteristics, MCID methodology and estimates were assessed and extracted by two authors. A triangulated mean was obtained for each tool's MCID, with two-thirds weighting for anchor-based and one-third for distribution-based results. This was then multiplied by a weighted factor based upon the study size and quality rating.Overall, 785 records were reviewed of which 21 studies were included for analysis. MCIDs of 12 tools were presented. General quality and risk of bias were average to good. Triangulated MCIDs for the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) were -2.54, -0.43 and -7.43 for improvement. Too few and/or too diverse studies were present to triangulate MCIDs of other tools.Evidence for the MCID of the CAT and CCQ was strong and triangulation was valid. Currently used MCIDs in clinical practice for the SGRQ (4) and Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (0.5) did not match the reviewed content, for which the MCIDs were much higher. Using too low MCIDs may lead to an overestimation of the interpretation of treatment effects. MCIDs for deterioration were scarce, which highlights the need for more research.

Comorbid Dysphagia and Dyspnea in Muscle Tension Dysphonia: A Global Laryngeal Musculoskeletal Problem

Objective

To characterize the associated symptoms of dysphagia and dyspnea among patients presenting with muscle tension dysphonia (MTD).

Study Design

Retrospective chart review performed over a 14-month period from October 2014 to December 2015.

Setting

Voice and swallowing center of a tertiary academic medical center.

Subjects and Methods

Thirty-eight patients with MTD were included for analysis. Clinical data were collected and analyzed, including perceptual voice evaluation and patient-reported outcomes measures.

Results

Among patients with a diagnosis of MTD, the incidence of reported dysphagia during clinical history and examination was 44.7%. Among patients with MTD, 60.5% had an EAT-10 (10-item Eating Assessment Tool) score ≥3 (ie, abnormal). Patients who reported dysphagia and/or had abnormal EAT-10 score (≥3) had significantly greater voice impairment than that of patients without dysphagia (P = .02). Patients who reported dysphagia also had significantly higher Clinical COPD Questionnaire scores than those of patients who reported only dysphonia (P = .002).

Conclusions

Patients presenting for dysphonia who are diagnosed with MTD have a high rate of comorbid dysphagia. Patients who reported dysphagia had significantly higher self-reported voice impairment and greater severity of breathing dysfunction as measured by the Clinical COPD Questionnaire. The coincidence of these symptoms in this patient cohort may suggest an underlying pathophysiology that has yet to be elucidated. Further prospective studies are needed to clarify the underlying cause of dysphagia and breathing dysfunction in the setting of MTD and to investigate diagnostic and therapeutic paradigms.

Assessing health status over time: impact of recall period and anchor question on the minimal clinically important difference of copd health status tools

Background

The Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) assesses what change on a measurement tool can be considered minimal clinically relevant. Although the recall period can influence questionnaire scores, it is unclear if it influences the MCID. This study is the first to examine longitudinally the impact of the recall period of an anchor question and its design on the MCID of COPD health status tools using the COPD Assessment Test (CAT), Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ) and the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ).

Methods

Moderate to very severe COPD patients without respiratory co-morbidities were recruited during 3-week Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR). CAT, CCQ and SGRQ were completed at baseline, discharge, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. A 15-point Global Rating of Change scale (GRC) was completed at each follow-up. A five-point GRC was used as second anchor at 12 months. Mean change scores of a subset of patients indicating a minimal improvement on each of the anchor questions were considered the MCID. The MCID estimates over different time periods were compared with one another by evaluating the degree of overlap of Confidence Intervals (CI) adjusted for dependency.

Results

In total 451 patients were included (57.9 ± 6.6 years, 65% male, 50/39/11% GOLD II/III/IV), of which 309 completed follow-up. Baseline health status scores were 20.2 ± 7.3 (CAT), 2.9 ± 1.2 (CCQ) and 50.7 ± 17.3 (SGRQ). MCID estimates for improvement ranged − 3.1 to − 1.4 for CAT, − 0.6 to − 0.3 for CCQ, and − 10.3 to − 7.6 for SGRQ. Absolute higher – though not significant – MCIDs were observed for CAT and CCQ directly after PR. Significantly absolute lower MCID estimates were observed for CAT (difference − 1.4: CI -2.3 to − 0.5) and CCQ (difference − 0.2: CI -0.3 to −0.1) using a five-point GRC.

Conclusions

The recall period of a 15-point anchor question seemed to have limited impact on the MCID for improvement of CAT, CCQ and SGRQ during PR; although a 3-week MCID estimate directly after PR might lead to absolute higher values. However, the design of the anchor question was likely to influence the MCID of CAT and CCQ.

Trial registration

RIMTCORE trial #DRKS00004609 and #12107 (Ethik-Kommission der Bayerischen Landesärztekammer).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12955-018-0950-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Singing for Lung Health: service evaluation of the British Lung Foundation programme

AIMS

Singing for Lung Health (SLH) is a novel intervention for individuals with respiratory disease. Qualitative results suggest benefits to physical, mental and emotional health. Limited data also suggest objective improvements in measures of quality of life with SLH are achievable. It is not known how effective the SLH groups supported by the British Lung Foundation (BLF) in the UK are. The objective was to understand the clinical impact SLH has on individuals with respiratory disease.

METHODS

The BLF conducted a questionnaire survey of singers with respiratory disease from new SLH groups set up in 2016-2017. Questionnaires were administered prior to participants' first session and after 12 weeks of singing. Health-related quality of life, patient activation, anxiety and breathlessness outcomes were included. Healthcare resource utilisation including general practitioner (GP) visits, hospitalisations and frequency of inhaler use were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 228 singers participated from 26 SLH groups in the UK. Participants were 70.7 (10.1) years old, 156 (68.4%) were female and 114 (47.5%) had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In all, 113 (49.5%) participants provided 12-week data. There were significant improvements in COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score (Mean = -1.4, CI: (-0.25 to -2.48) (  p = .017)). Furthermore, 45% of singers reported reduced GP visits (  p ≤ .001) and 18% reported reduced hospital admissions (  p = .01). However, there were no significant improvements in general quality of life, anxiety, patient activation, breathlessness or inhaler use. Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between people who completed the 12-week evaluation and those who did not.

CONCLUSIONS

This service evaluation found that participants in SLH groups report improvement in respiratory health-related quality of life and a reduction in healthcare utilisation. SLH has potential economic and health benefits. Therefore, to confirm these findings, these endpoints should be evaluated further in large-scale randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Minimal important difference of target lobar volume reduction after endobronchial valve treatment for emphysema

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Target lobar volume reduction (TLVR) is an important efficacy outcome measure for bronchoscopic lung volume reduction (BLVR) treatment using one-way endobronchial valves (EBV) in patients with severe emphysema. The commonly used cut-off value for TLVR that expresses a perceivable clinical benefit is -350 mL. However, a scientifically determined minimal important difference (MID) for TLVR never has been published. The objective of the present study was to determine the MID for TLVR on HRCT in patients who were treated with EBV.

METHODS

A total of 318 patients with severe emphysema from two BLVR trials were analysed. Anchor-based methods were used to define the TLVR MID at 6 months follow-up. Forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV₁ ), residual volume (RV) and St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) were used as anchors.

RESULTS

The calculated TLVR MID with each anchor was: FEV₁ -587 mL, RV -534 mL and SGRQ -560 mL. The combined MID (average of the three anchor-based MIDs) was -563 mL.

CONCLUSION

Using the anchor-based method, we established a TLVR MID of -563 mL in patients with severe emphysema at 6 months follow-up after EBV treatment. This value can be useful for both interpreting the results from trials and clinical practice, as well as for designing future studies on lung volume reduction.

The Effect of Integration of Self-Management Web Platforms on Health Status in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Management in Primary Care (e-Vita Study): Interrupted Time Series Design

BACKGROUND

Worldwide nearly 3 million people die from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) every year. Integrated disease management (IDM) improves quality of life for COPD patients and can reduce hospitalization. Self-management of COPD through eHealth is an effective method to improve IDM and clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this implementation study was to investigate the effect of 3 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease eHealth programs applied in primary care on health status. The e-Vita COPD study compares different levels of integration of Web-based self-management platforms in IDM in 3 primary care settings. Patient health status is examined using the Clinical COPD Questionnaire (CCQ).

METHODS

The parallel cohort design includes 3 levels of integration in IDM (groups 1, 2, 3) and randomization of 2 levels of personal assistance for patients (group A, high assistance, group B, low assistance). Interrupted time series (ITS) design was used to collect CCQ data at multiple time points before and after intervention, and multilevel linear regression modeling was used to analyze CCQ data.

RESULTS

Of the 702 invited patients, 215 (30.6%) registered to a platform. Of these, 82 participated in group 1 (high integration IDM), 36 in group 1A (high assistance), and 46 in group 1B (low assistance); 96 participated in group 2 (medium integration IDM), 44 in group 2A (high assistance) and 52 in group 2B (low assistance); also, 37 participated in group 3 (no integration IDM). In the total group, no significant difference was found in change in CCQ trend (P=.334) before (-0.47% per month) and after the intervention (-0.084% per month). Also, no significant difference was found in CCQ changes before versus after the intervention between the groups with high versus low personal assistance. In all subgroups, there was no significant change in the CCQ trend before and after the intervention (group 1A, P=.237; 1B, P=.991; 2A, P=.120; 2B, P=.166; 3, P=.945).

CONCLUSIONS

The e-Vita eHealth-supported COPD programs had no beneficial impact on the health status of COPD patients. Also, no differences were found between the patient groups receiving different levels of personal assistance.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Registry NTR4098; http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=4098 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6sbM5PayG).