Randomized feasibility study of twice a day functional electrostimulation in patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease hospitalized for acute exacerbation

Effectiveness of neuromuscular electrical stimulation in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness and acceptability of neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effectiveness and accessibility of NMES and compared them with usual care in patients with acute exacerbation of COPD by searching databases such as MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials published up to April 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with COPD who were treated within 3 weeks of acute exacerbation onset were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the RoB 2 tools. We pooled limb muscle strength and adverse events and performed a comparison between NMES and usual care. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

Five RCTs, including 168 patients, met the eligibility criteria. The meta-analysis showed that limb muscle strength was significantly higher in the NMES group (four studies with 148 patients; standardized mean difference, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-1.30; p < 0.001). The quality of evidence was very low due to the risk of bias within the studies, imprecision of the estimates, and small number of studies. Any adverse events served as outcomes in three studies (86 patients), although no adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSION

NMES is safe for patients with acute exacerbation of COPD and may maintain and improve limb muscle strength; however, the quality of evidence was very low.

Pulmonary rehabilitation for acute exacerbations of COPD: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

This systematic review summarized the evidence on the effects (benefits and harms) of pulmonary rehabilitation for individuals with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials comparing pulmonary rehabilitation to either active interventions or usual care regardless of setting. In March 2022, we searched MEDLINE, Scopus, CENTRAL, CINAHL and Web of Sciences, and trial registries. Record screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were undertaken by two reviewers. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

RESULTS

This systematic review included 18 studies (n = 1465), involving a combination of mixed settings (8 studies), inpatient settings (8 studies), and outpatient settings (2 studies). The studies were at high risk of performance, detection, and reporting biases. Compared to usual care, pulmonary rehabilitation probably improves AECOPD-related hospital readmissions (relative risk 0.56, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.86; moderate certainty evidence) and cardiovascular submaximal capacity (standardized mean difference 0.73, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.99; moderate certainty evidence). Low certainty evidence suggests that pulmonary rehabilitation may be beneficial on re-exacerbations, dyspnoea, and impact of disease. The evidence regarding the effects of pulmonary rehabilitation on health-related quality of life and mortality is very uncertain (very low certainty evidence).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that pulmonary rehabilitation may be an effective treatment option for individuals with AECOPD, irrespective of setting. Our certainty in this evidence base was limited due to small studies, heterogeneous rehabilitation programs, numerous methodological weaknesses, and a poor reporting of findings that were inconsistent with each other. Trialists should adhere to the latest reporting standards to strengthen this body of evidence.

REGISTRATION

The study protocol was registered in Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/amgbz/).

Safety and Efficacy of Inpatient Pulmonary Rehabilitation for Patients Hospitalized with an Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Systematic Review and Meta-analyses

Rationale: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) during hospitalization for acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) occurs during a period of disease instability for the patient, and the safety and efficacy of PR, specifically during the hospitalization period, have not been established. Objective: The purpose of this review is to determine the safety and efficacy of PR during the hospitalization phase for individuals with AECOPD. Methods: Scientific databases were searched up to August 2022 for randomized controlled trials that compared in-hospital PR with usual care. PR programs commenced during the hospitalization and included a minimum of two sessions. Titles and abstracts followed by full-text screening and data extraction were conducted independently by two reviewers. The intervention effect estimates were calculated through meta-analysis using a random-effect model. Results: A total of 27 studies were included (n = 1,317). The meta-analysis showed that inpatient PR improved the 6-minute-walk distance by 105 m (P < 0.001). Inpatient PR improved the performance on the five-repetition sit-to-stand test by -7.02 seconds (P = 0.03). Quality of life (QOL), as measured by the 5-level EuroQoL Group-5 dimension version (EQ-ED-5L) and the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire, was significantly improved by the intervention. Inpatient PR increased lower limb muscle strength by 33.35 N (P < 0.001). There was no change in the length of stay. Only one serious adverse event related to the intervention was reported. Conclusions: This review suggests that it is safe and effective to provide PR during hospitalization for individuals with AECOPD. In-hospital PR improves functional exercise capacity, QOL, and lower limb strength without prolonging the hospital length of stay.

A systematic review of exercise studies for individuals hospitalized with an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Focus on the principles of exercise training

BACKGROUND

For exercise interventions to be effectively reproduced or applied in a "real world" clinical setting, clinical trials must thoroughly document all components of the exercise prescription and ensure that participants adhere to each component. However, previous reviews have not critically examined the quality of exercise prescription of inpatient Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) programs.

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this review were to evaluate the (a) application of the principles of exercise training, (b) reporting of the frequency, intensity, time and type (FITT) components of exercise prescription, and (c) reporting of patient's adherence to the FITT components in intervention studies for patients admitted to hospital for an acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD).

METHODS

Relevant scientific databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared in-hospital PR with usual care for people hospitalized with AECOPD. Title and abstract followed by full-text screening were conducted independently by two reviewers. Data were extracted and synthesized to evaluate the application of the principles of exercise training and the reporting/adherence of the FITT components.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven RCTs were included. Only two applied all principles of exercise training. Specificity was applied by 70%, progression by 48%, overload by 37%, initial values by 89% and diminishing returns and reversibility by 37% of trials. Ten trials adequately reported all FITT components. Frequency and type were the components most reported (85% and 81%, respectively), while intensity was less frequently reported (52%). Only three trials reported on the patient's adherence to all four components.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies have not adequately reported the exercise prescription in accordance with the principles of exercise training nor reported all the FITT components of the exercise prescription and patient's adherence to them. Therefore, interpretation of the current literature is limited and information for developing exercise prescriptions to individuals hospitalized with an AECOPD is lacking.

Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programmes Within Three Days of Hospitalization for Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of early pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) (ie, <3 days of hospitalization) in patients with acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD).

Methods

Embase, Web of Science, PubMed and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception to 1 April 2021. Randomized controlled trials were included if they observed the efficacy of early PR in AECOPD patients. Study selection, data extraction, risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed by two researchers independently. Assessment of the risk of bias and eidence quality were evaluated by the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system, respectively.

Results

Fourteen trials (829 participants) were identified. Significant improvement was found in the 6-minute walk distance (6MWD; mean difference (MD): 69.64; 95% CI: 40.26 to 99.01; Z = 4.65, P < 0.0001, low quality). In the subgroup analysis, the exercise-training group showed marked improvement (MD: 96.14; 95% CI: 20.24 to 172.04; Z = 2.48, P = 0.001). The Saint George’s Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score was low (MD: −12.77; 95% CI: −16.03 to −9.50; Z = 7.67, P < 0.0001, moderate quality). Significant effects were not found for the duration of hospital stay, quadriceps muscle strength or five times sit to stand test. Only one serious adverse event was reported in experimental group, which was not associated with early PR.

Conclusion

PR initiated <3 days of hospitalization may increase exercise capacity and improve quality of life, but the results should be interpreted prudently and dialectically, and the role of early PR in AECOPD needs further exploration.

A Feasibility and Efficacy Randomized Controlled Trial of Two Exercise Programs in Severe AECOPD Patients with Resting Hypoxemia

Resting hypoxemia is the most severe stage of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). Due to their impairments during the exacerbation, these patients are limited to traditional exercise rehabilitation and are excluded from the majority of the studies. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and the efficacy of two exercise programs in Acute Exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD) patients with resting hypoxemia. In this randomized clinical trial, patients hospitalized due to an acute exacerbation of COPD with hypoxemia at rest were included. Patients were randomly assigned into three groups. A Control Group (pharmacological treatment), a Global Exercise Group (GEG), and a Functional Electrostimulation Group (FEG). Patients were treated during the hospitalization period. The main outcomes were lower limb strength (assessed by a dynamometer), balance (assessed by the one leg standing balance test), health related quality of life (assessed by the EQ-5D), adverse events and adherence. At the end of the intervention, there were significant differences in all the variables in favour of the experimental groups (p < 0.05). We concluded that conducting an exercise program is feasible and improves lower limb strength, balance, and health related quality of life in AECOPD patients with resting hypoxemia.

Design of pulmonary rehabilitation programmes during acute exacerbations of COPD: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

This systematic review aimed to systematise the different designs used to deliver pulmonary rehabilitation during acute exacerbations of COPD (AECOPD) and explore which ones are the most effective. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO and Cochrane were searched. Randomised controlled trials comparing pulmonary rehabilitation or at least one of its components with usual care or comparing different components of pulmonary rehabilitation were included. Network meta-analysis was conducted in MetaXL 5.3 using a generalised pairwise modelling framework. Pooled effects compared each treatment to usual care. 42 studies were included. Most studies were conducted in an inpatient setting (57%) and started the intervention 24-48 h after hospital admission (24%). Exercise training (71%), education and psychosocial support (57%) and breathing techniques (55%) were the most used components. Studies combining exercise with breathing techniques presented the larger effects on exercise capacity (weighted mean difference (WMD) -41.06, 95% CI -131.70-49.58) and health-related quality of life (WMD 16.07, 95% CI 10.29-21.84), and breathing techniques presented the larger effects on dyspnoea (WMD 1.90, 95% CI 0.53-3.27) and length of hospitalisation (effect size =0.15, 95% CI -0.28-0.57). A few minor adverse events were found.Pulmonary rehabilitation is a safe intervention during AECOPD. Exercise, breathing techniques, and education and psychosocial support seem to be the core components for implementing pulmonary rehabilitation during AECOPD. Studies may now focus on comparisons of optimal timings to start the intervention, total duration of the intervention, duration and frequency of sessions, and intensity for exercise prescription.