Interdisciplinary COPD intervention in primary care: a cluster randomised controlled trial

Teamwork and its impact on chronic disease clinical outcomes in primary care: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Teamwork positively affects staff performance and patient outcomes in chronic disease management. However, there is limited research on the impact of specific team components on clinical outcomes. This review aims to explore the impact of teamwork components on key clinical outcomes of chronic diseases in primary care.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis conducted searching EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Studies included must have at least one teamwork component, conducted in primary care for selected chronic diseases, and report an impact of teamwork on clinical outcomes. Mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were used to determine pooled effects of intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 54 studies from 1988 to 2021 were reviewed. Shared decision-making, roles sharing, and leadership were missing in most studies. Team-based intervention showed a reduction in mean systolic blood pressure (MD = 5.88, 95% CI 3.29-8.46, P= <0.001, I2 = 95%), diastolic blood pressure (MD = 3.23, 95% CI 1.53 to 4.92, P = <0.001, I2 = 94%), and HbA1C (MD = 0.38, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.54, P = <0.001, I2 = 58%). More team components led to better SBP and DBP outcomes, while individual team components have no impact on HbA1C. Fewer studies limit analysis of cholesterol levels, hospitalizations, emergency visits and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-related outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Team-based interventions improve outcomes for chronic diseases, but more research is needed on managing cholesterol, hospitalizations, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Studies with 4-5 team components were more effective in reducing systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure. Heterogeneity should be considered, and additional research is needed to optimize interventions for specific patient populations.

Cluster randomised controlled trial of specialist-led integrated COPD care (INTEGR COPD)

OBJECTIVE

Studies in hospital settings demonstrate that there is greater guideline adherence when care is delivered by a respiratory specialist, however, this has not been explored in primary care. The aim of this study is to determine the impact integrating respiratory specialists into primary care has on the delivery of guideline adherent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) care.

METHODS

18 general practitioner (GP) practices were randomised to provide either usual or specialist-led COPD care. Patients at participating practices were included if they had an existing diagnosis of COPD. Outcomes were measured at the individual patient level. The primary outcome was guideline adherence, assessed as achieving four or more items of the COPD care bundle. Secondary outcome measures included quality of life, number of exacerbations, number of COPD-related hospitalisations and respiratory outpatient attendances.

RESULTS

586 patients from 10 practices randomised to the intervention and 656 patients from 8 practices randomised to the control arm of the study were included. The integration of respiratory specialists into GP practices led to a statistically significant (p<0.001) improvement in the provision of guideline adherent care when compared with usual care in this cohort (92.7% vs 70.1%) (OR 4.14, 95% CI 2.14 to 8.03).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to demonstrate that guideline adherence is improved through the integration of respiratory specialists into GP practices to deliver annual COPD reviews. To facilitate changes in current healthcare practice and policy, the findings of this paper need to be viewed in combination with qualitative research exploring the acceptability of specialist integration.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03482700.

Case-Finding and Treatment Effects in COPD: Secondary Analysis of an Interdisciplinary Intervention Trial

Background

US Preventive Services Taskforce recommends against screening for COPD in asymptomatic adults due to limited evidence on the efficacy of treatments for this population. However, global and Australian guidelines recommend a case-finding approach where those with symptoms and/or risk factors, including smoking, are screened. This study aims to explore patient characteristics by time of COPD diagnosis and the effectiveness of early treatment in those with or without symptoms.

Methods

Secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial that included those with a pre-existing (n=130) or new diagnosis (n=142) of COPD. Those randomised to the intervention arm received an interdisciplinary intervention of smoking cessation support, home medicines review and home-based pulmonary rehabilitation, while controls received usual care. The primary outcome was health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) measured using St George's Respiratory Questionnaire. To estimate the impact of early treatment, we compared the effectiveness of treatment versus control at 6- and 12-months for the new versus pre-existing diagnosis groups, and those symptomatic versus asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic based on COPD Assessment Test score.

Results

Approximately half of those newly diagnosed with COPD were already symptomatic. Early treatment in those diagnosed via case-finding had a positive non-significant impact on HR-QoL. The size of the treatment effects generally favoured the pre-existing diagnosis group when compared to case-finding and favoured those symptomatic when compared to those asymptomatic.

Conclusion

Despite useful insights into the impacts of case-finding and early treatments, this study, like most others, was not sufficiently powered. Further larger studies or combining sub-groups across studies are required.

Physicians' Knowledge of Pulmonary Rehabilitation in China: A Cross-Sectional Study

Objective

To investigate the knowledge of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) among physicians involved in pulmonary disease management.

Methods

This multi-regional cross-sectional survey was conducted from December 12, 2019 to January 22, 2020. The participants were enrolled and an electronic questionnaire was exclusively sent to the members of the Lung Cancer Special Committee of the China Medicine Education Association through the WeChat platform. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to explore the associated factors of high PR knowledge scores (≥ 18 points).

Results

From the 858 valid questionnaires, the routine implementation of PR was only reported for 16.95% of physicians. The main reason hindering the implementation of PR for patients was the limited knowledge and awareness of PR among the physicians involved (69.1%). A total of 618 and 240 physicians had high and low knowledge scores, respectively. Multivariable analysis suggests that the self-perception of PR knowledge (OR = 1.89, 95% CI: 1.32-2.771, P = 0.001) was independently associated with high knowledge scores, while having no theoretical knowledge of PR was associated with poor knowledge scores (OR = 0.43, 95% CI: 0.26-0.72, P = 0.001).

Conclusion

Inadequate knowledge of pulmonary rehabilitation is evident among physicians who are involved in pulmonary disease management in China. This underscores the need for more comprehensive and standardized training to bolster their awareness and effective utilization of pulmonary rehabilitation.

Diversity in pulmonary rehabilitation clinical trials: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Underrepresentation of minority groups in clinical trials may hinder the potential benefits of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) programs for individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The aim of this work was to determine whether participants in PR randomized control trials (RCTs) conducted in the U.S.A., Canada, the UK, and Australia are representative of ethnicity, sex, gender, and sociodemographic characteristics.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A systematic search was performed for relevant literature from inception to December 2022. Titles and abstracts were screened before undergoing a full article review. Relevant data on reporting of age, sex, gender, ethnicity, and sociodemographic characteristics of participants was extracted.

RESULTS

Thirty-six RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Only 6% of publications reported on ethnicity, with ≥90% of participants reported as 'White.' All 36 papers reported on age, with the mean between 60 and 69 years old. Thirty-five studies reported on sex (97%), with the majority (67%) reporting more male than female participants. There was no mention of different genders in any paper. Other sociodemographic factors were reported in 7 (19%) papers.

CONCLUSIONS

Inclusivity and representation in clinical trials are essential to ensure that research findings are generalizable. Clinical trialists need to consider the demographics of today's society during recruitment.

A novel, multidomain, primary care nurse-led and mHealth-assisted intervention for dementia risk reduction in middle-aged adults (HAPPI MIND): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Middle-aged multidomain risk reduction interventions targeting modifiable risk factors for dementia may delay or prevent a third of dementia cases in later life. We describe the protocol of a cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT), HAPPI MIND (Holistic Approach in Primary care for PreventIng Memory Impairment aNd Dementia). HAPPI MIND will evaluate the efficacy of a multidomain, nurse-led, mHealth supported intervention for assessing dementia risk and reducing associated risk factors in middle-aged adults in the Australian primary care setting.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

General practice clinics (n≥26) across Victoria and New South Wales, Australia, will be recruited and randomised. Practice nurses will be trained to implement the HAPPI MIND intervention or a brief intervention. Patients of participating practices aged 45-65 years with ≥2 potential dementia risk factors will be identified and recruited (approximately 15 patients/clinic). Brief intervention participants receive a personalised report outlining their risk factors for dementia based on Australian National University Alzheimer's Disease Risk Index (ANU-ADRI) scores, education booklet and referral to their general practitioner as appropriate. HAPPI MIND participants receive the brief intervention as well as six individualised dementia risk reduction sessions with a nurse trained in motivational interviewing and principles of behaviour change, a personalised risk reduction action plan and access to the purpose-built HAPPI MIND smartphone app for risk factor self-management. Follow-up data collection will occur at 12, 24 and 36 months. Primary outcome is ANU-ADRI score change at 12 months from baseline. Secondary outcomes include change in cognition, quality of life and individual risk factors of dementia.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Project approved by Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee (ID: 28273). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at healthcare conferences. If effective in reducing dementia risk, the HAPPI MIND intervention could be integrated into primary care, scaled up nationally and sustained over time.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12621001168842.

The effects of an innovative GP-physiotherapist partnership in improving COPD management in primary care

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that management of people with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) in primary care has been suboptimal, in particular, with low referral rates to pulmonary rehabilitation (PR). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a GP-physiotherapist partnership in optimising management of COPD in primary care.

METHODS

A pragmatic, pilot, before and after study was conducted in four general practices in Australia. A senior cardiorespiratory physiotherapist was partnered with each general practice. Adults with a history of smoking and/or COPD, aged ≥ 40 years with ≥ 2 practice visits in the previous year were recruited following spirometric confirmation of COPD. Intervention was provided by the physiotherapist at the general practice and included PR referral, physical activity and smoking cessation advice, provision of a pedometer and review of inhaler technique. Intervention occurred at baseline, one month and three months. Main outcomes included PR referral and attendance. Secondary clinical outcomes included changes in COPD Assessment Test (CAT) score, dyspnoea, health activation and pedometer step count. Process outcomes included count of initiation of smoking cessation interventions and review of inhaler technique.

RESULTS

A total of 148 participants attended a baseline appointment where pre/post bronchodilator spirometry was performed. 31 participants with airflow obstruction on post-bronchodilator spirometry (mean age 75yrs (SD 9.3), mean FEV₁% pred = 75% (SD 18.6), 61% female) received the intervention. At three months, 78% (21/27) were referred to PR and 38% (8/21) had attended PR. No significant improvements were seen in CAT scores, dyspnoea or health activation. There was no significant change in average daily step count at three months compared to baseline (mean difference (95% CI) -266 steps (-956 to 423), p = 0.43). Where indicated, all participants had smoking cessation interventions initiated and inhaler technique reviewed.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that this model was able to increase referrals to PR from primary care and was successful in implementing some aspects of COPD management, however, was insufficient to improve symptom scores and physical activity levels in people with COPD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ANZCTR, ACTRN12619001127190. Registered 12 August 2019 - Retrospectively registered, http://www.ANZCTR.org.au/ACTRN12619001127190.aspx .

Effectiveness of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation: systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Despite proven effectiveness for people with chronic respiratory diseases, practical barriers to attending centre-based pulmonary rehabilitation (centre-PR) limit accessibility. We aimed to review the clinical effectiveness, components and completion rates of home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (home-PR) compared to centre-PR or usual care.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Using Cochrane methodology, we searched (January 1990 to August 2021) six electronic databases using a PICOS (population, intervention, comparison, outcome, study type) search strategy, assessed Cochrane risk of bias, performed meta-analysis and narrative synthesis to answer our objectives and used the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations framework to rate certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

We identified 16 studies (1800 COPD patients; 11 countries). The effects of home-PR on exercise capacity and/or health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were compared to either centre-PR (n=7) or usual care (n=8); one study used both comparators. Compared to usual care, home-PR significantly improved exercise capacity (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.88, 95% CI 0.32-1.44; p=0.002) and HRQoL (SMD -0.62, 95% CI -0.88--0.36; p<0.001). Compared to centre-PR, home-PR showed no significant difference in exercise capacity (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.25-0.05; p=0.21) or HRQoL (SMD 0.01, 95% CI -0.15-0.17; p=0.87).

CONCLUSION

Home-PR is as effective as centre-PR in improving functional exercise capacity and quality of life compared to usual care, and is an option to enable access to pulmonary rehabilitation.

Developments in smoking cessation interventions for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the past 5 years: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

Smoking cessation is the most effective strategy for slowing the progression of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). However, COPD patients find it difficult to quit smoking with standard cessation interventions.

AREAS COVERED

A scoping review of smoking cessation for COPD patients was conducted by searching the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for all studies published between 1 January 2016 and 22 September 2021. Four themes were set up and 47 studies were included eventually. The majority of the included studies (61.7%, 29/47) investigated efficacy and effectiveness, including new strategies for extended treatment and mobile health (mHealth) delivery approach. Studies examining accessibility and utilization (31.9%, 15/47), safety (10.6%, 5/47), and health economics (6.4%, 3/47) were also reviewed. The quality of the included randomized controlled trials was also evaluated.

EXPERT OPINION

Pharmacotherapy combined with behavioral interventions delivered via mHealth may be a promising strategy to help COPD smokers quit. However, the overall quality of the current studies is poor, making it challenging for clinicians to make informed decisions. Future high-quality studies are needed to provide conclusive evidence on the optimal pharmacotherapies and the most cost-effective comprehensive smoking cessation interventions, particularly those integrated into disease management for smokers with COPD.

Screening for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force

IMPORTANCE

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the US.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a targeted systematic review to update the evidence on the effectiveness of screening for COPD and the treatment of COPD to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) update of the 2016 recommendation statement on COPD screening.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and CINAHL for relevant studies published between January 1, 2015, to January 22, 2021; surveillance through March 25, 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

English-language studies of screening in individuals who do not recognize or report respiratory symptoms; studies of treatment in persons with mild or moderate, or minimally symptomatic, COPD.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers independently appraised the articles and extracted relevant data from fair- or good-quality studies; no quantitative synthesis was conducted.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

COPD-related morbidity or mortality, measures of health-related quality of life, and adverse events.

RESULTS

The review included no trials on the effectiveness of screening, 3 trials or analyses (n = 20 058) of pharmacologic treatment published since 2015, 13 trials (n = 3657) on nonpharmacologic interventions, and 2 large observational studies (n = 243 517) addressing the harms of pharmacologic treatment published since 2015. The results from the clinical trials of pharmacologic therapy are consistent with the previous review supporting the USPSTF that bronchodilators with or without inhaled corticosteroids can reduce COPD exacerbations and tiotropium can improve health-related quality of life in adults with moderate COPD. Overall, there was no consistent benefit observed for any type of nonpharmacologic intervention across a range of patient outcomes. None of the included treatment trials that reported adverse effects found significant harms. Two large observational studies in a screen-relevant population demonstrated an association of the initiation of a long-acting muscarinic antagonist or long-acting beta agonist with the risk of a serious cardiovascular event in treatment-naïve patients and an association of inhaled corticosteroids use with the risk of developing diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this targeted evidence update are generally consistent with the findings of the previous systematic review supporting the 2016 USPSTF recommendation. Evidence of pharmacologic treatment was still largely limited to persons with moderate airflow obstruction, and there was no consistent benefit observed for a range of nonpharmacologic interventions in mild to moderate COPD or in minimally symptomatic persons with COPD.

Educational interventions for health professionals managing chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in primary care

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common, preventable and treatable health condition. COPD is associated with substantial burden on morbidity, mortality and healthcare resources.

OBJECTIVES

To review existing evidence for educational interventions delivered to health professionals managing COPD in the primary care setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register from inception to May 2021. The Register includes records from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED) and PsycINFO. We also searched online trial registries and reference lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs. Eligible studies tested educational interventions aimed at any health professionals involved in the management of COPD in primary care. Educational interventions were defined as interventions aimed at upskilling, improving or refreshing existing knowledge of health professionals in the diagnosis and management of COPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed abstracts and full texts of eligible studies, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. We conducted meta-analyses where possible and used random-effects models to yield summary estimates of effect (mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)). We performed narrative synthesis when meta-analysis was not possible. We assessed the overall certainty of evidence for each outcome using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Primary outcomes were: 1) proportion of COPD diagnoses confirmed with spirometry; 2) proportion of patients with COPD referred to, participating in or completing pulmonary rehabilitation; and 3) proportion of patients with COPD prescribed respiratory medication consistent with guideline recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 38 studies(22 cluster-RCTs and 16 RCTs) involving 4936 health professionals (reported in 19/38 studies) and 71,085 patient participants (reported in 25/38 studies). Thirty-six included studies evaluated interventions versus usual care; seven studies also reported a comparison between two or more interventions as part of a three- to five-arm RCT design. A range of simple to complex interventions were used across the studies, with common intervention features including education provided to health professionals via training sessions, workshops or online modules (31 studies), provision of practice support tools, tool kits and/or algorithms (10 studies), provision of guidelines (nine studies) and training on spirometry (five studies). Health professionals targeted by the interventions were most commonly general practitioners alone (20 studies) or in combination with nurses or allied health professionals (eight studies), and the majority of studies were conducted in general practice clinics. We identified performance bias as high risk for 33 studies. We also noted risk of selection, detection, attrition and reporting biases, although to a varying extent across studies. The evidence of efficacy was equivocal for all the three primary endpoints evaluated: 1) proportion of COPD diagnoses confirmed with spirometry (of the four studies that reported this outcome, two supported the intervention); 2) proportion of patients with COPD who are referred to, participate in or complete pulmonary rehabilitation (of the four studies that reported this outcome, two supported the intervention); and 3) proportion of patients with COPD prescribed respiratory medications consistent with guideline recommendations (12 studies reported this outcome, the majority evaluated multiple drug classes and reported a mixed effect). Additionally, the low quality of evidence and potential risk of bias make the interpretation more difficult. Moderate-quality evidence (downgraded due to risk of bias concerns) suggests that educational interventions for health professionals probably improve the proportion of patients with COPD vaccinated against influenza (three studies) and probably have little impact on the proportion of patients vaccinated against pneumococcal infection (two studies). Low-quality evidence suggests that educational interventions for health professionals may have little or no impact on the frequency of COPD exacerbations (10 studies). There was a high degree of heterogeneity in the reporting of health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Low-quality evidence suggests that educational interventions for health professionals may have little or no impact on HRQoL overall, and when using the COPD-specific HRQoL instrument, the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (at six months MD 0.87, 95% CI -2.51 to 4.26; 2 studies, 406 participants, and at 12 months MD -0.43, 95% CI -1.52 to 0.67, 4 studies, 1646 participants; reduction in score indicates better health). Moderate-quality evidence suggests that educational interventions for health professionals may improve patient satisfaction with care (one study). We identified no studies that reported adverse outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence of efficacy was equivocal for educational interventions for health professionals in primary care on the proportion of COPD diagnoses confirmed with spirometry, the proportion of patients with COPD who participate in pulmonary rehabilitation, and the proportion of patients prescribed guideline-recommended COPD respiratory medications. Educational interventions for health professionals may improve influenza vaccination rates among patients with COPD and patient satisfaction with care. The quality of evidence for most outcomes was low or very low due to heterogeneity and methodological limitations of the studies included in the review, which means that there is uncertainty about the benefits of any currently published educational interventions for healthcare professionals to improve COPD management in primary care. Further well-designed RCTs are needed to investigate the effects of educational interventions delivered to health professionals managing COPD in the primary care setting.

The Effects of an Acceptance and Commitment-Informed Interdisciplinary Rehabilitation Program for Chronic Airway Diseases on Health Status and Psychological Symptoms

BACKGROUND

Chronic airway diseases are prevalent and costly conditions. Interdisciplinary rehabilitation programs that include Acceptance and Commitment-based (ACT) components could be important to tackle the vicious circle linking progression of the disease, inactivity, and psychopathological symptoms.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation of routinely collected data of an interdisciplinary rehabilitation program was performed. The program included group sessions including patient education, breathing exercise, occupational therapy and an ACT-based psychological treatment, and individual sessions of physical therapy. Demographic data, clinical characteristics of the patients and the values of outcome variables (health status, quality of life, anxiety, and depression) before treatment, at discharge, at 3 months, and at 6 months were extracted from medical records. Multiple imputation was employed to address missing data. Linear mixed models were employed to assess changes over time. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to assess predictors of a minimum clinically important change of health status from baseline to the 6-months follow-up.

RESULTS

Data from 31 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and 12 patients with bronchiectasis were extracted. Health status improved from baseline to discharge to the 3 months follow-up, but not to the 6 months follow-up. Anxiety and depression improved across all the time points. Quality of life did not improve over time. Having a worse health status at baseline and fewer depressive symptoms were significantly associated with achieving a minimum clinically important change of health status at 6 months. The effects of the interdisciplinary program were not different for patients with COPD or with bronchiectasis.

DISCUSSION

Interdisciplinary programs including ACT-based components are promising treatments for the rehabilitation of patients with chronic airway diseases.

Self-management interventions for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

Self-management interventions help people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to acquire and practise the skills they need to carry out disease-specific medical regimens, guide changes in health behaviour and provide emotional support to enable them to control their disease. Since the 2014 update of this review, several studies have been published.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of COPD self-management interventions compared to usual care in terms of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and respiratory-related hospital admissions. To evaluate the safety of COPD self-management interventions compared to usual care in terms of respiratory-related mortality and all-cause mortality. Secondary objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of COPD self-management interventions compared to usual care in terms of other health outcomes and healthcare utilisation. To evaluate effective characteristics of COPD self-management interventions.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, trials registries and the reference lists of included studies up until January 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-randomised trials (CRTs) published since 1995. To be eligible for inclusion, self-management interventions had to include at least two intervention components and include an iterative process between participant and healthcare provider(s) in which goals were formulated and feedback was given on self-management actions by the participant.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, assessed trial quality and extracted data. We resolved disagreements by reaching consensus or by involving a third review author. We contacted study authors to obtain additional information and missing outcome data where possible. Primary outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQoL), number of respiratory-related hospital admissions, respiratory-related mortality, and all-cause mortality. When appropriate, we pooled study results using random-effects modelling meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 studies involving 6008 participants with COPD. The follow-up time ranged from two-and-a-half to 24 months and the content of the interventions was diverse. Participants' mean age ranged from 57 to 74 years, and the proportion of male participants ranged from 33% to 98%. The post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) to forced vital capacity (FVC) ratio of participants ranged from 33.6% to 57.0%. The FEV1/FVC ratio is a measure used to diagnose COPD and to determine the severity of the disease. Studies were conducted on four different continents (Europe (n = 15), North America (n = 8), Asia (n = 1), and Oceania (n = 4); with one study conducted in both Europe and Oceania). Self-management interventions likely improve HRQoL, as measured by the St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score (lower score represents better HRQoL) with a mean difference (MD) from usual care of -2.86 points (95% confidence interval (CI) -4.87 to -0.85; 14 studies, 2778 participants; low-quality evidence). The pooled MD of -2.86 did not reach the SGRQ minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of four points. Self-management intervention participants were also at a slightly lower risk for at least one respiratory-related hospital admission (odds ratio (OR) 0.75, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.98; 15 studies, 3263 participants; very low-quality evidence). The number needed to treat to prevent one respiratory-related hospital admission over a mean of 9.75 months' follow-up was 15 (95% CI 8 to 399) for participants with high baseline risk and 26 (95% CI 15 to 677) for participants with low baseline risk. No differences were observed in respiratory-related mortality (risk difference (RD) 0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.04; 8 studies, 1572 participants ; low-quality evidence) and all-cause mortality (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.01; 24 studies, 5719 participants; low-quality evidence). We graded the evidence to be of 'moderate' to 'very low' quality according to GRADE. All studies had a substantial risk of bias, because of lack of blinding of participants and personnel to the interventions, which is inherently impossible in a self-management intervention. In addition, risk of bias was noticeably increased because of insufficient information regarding a) non-protocol interventions, and b) analyses to estimate the effect of adhering to interventions. Consequently, the highest GRADE evidence score that could be obtained by studies was 'moderate'.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Self-management interventions for people with COPD are associated with improvements in HRQoL, as measured with the SGRQ, and a lower probability of respiratory-related hospital admissions. No excess respiratory-related and all-cause mortality risks were observed, which strengthens the view that COPD self-management interventions are unlikely to cause harm. By using stricter inclusion criteria, we decreased heterogeneity in studies, but also reduced the number of included studies and therefore our capacity to conduct subgroup analyses. Data were therefore still insufficient to reach clear conclusions about effective (intervention) characteristics of COPD self-management interventions. As tailoring of COPD self-management interventions to individuals is desirable, heterogeneity is and will likely remain present in self-management interventions. For future studies, we would urge using only COPD self-management interventions that include iterative interactions between participants and healthcare professionals who are competent using behavioural change techniques (BCTs) to elicit participants' motivation, confidence and competence to positively adapt their health behaviour(s) and develop skills to better manage their disease. In addition, to inform further subgroup and meta-regression analyses and to provide stronger conclusions regarding effective COPD self-management interventions, there is a need for more homogeneity in outcome measures. More attention should be paid to behavioural outcome measures and to providing more detailed, uniform and transparently reported data on self-management intervention components and BCTs. Assessment of outcomes over the long term is also recommended to capture changes in people's behaviour. Finally, information regarding non-protocol interventions as well as analyses to estimate the effect of adhering to interventions should be included to increase the quality of evidence.

Integrated disease management interventions for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

BACKGROUND

People with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) show considerable variation in symptoms, limitations, and well-being; this often complicates medical care. A multi-disciplinary and multi-component programme that addresses different elements of care could improve quality of life (QoL) and exercise tolerance, while reducing the number of exacerbations.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of integrated disease management (IDM) programmes versus usual care for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in terms of health-related quality of life (QoL), exercise tolerance, and exacerbation-related outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Airways Group Register of Trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL for potentially eligible studies. Searches were current as of September 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared IDM programmes for COPD versus usual care were included. Interventions consisted of multi-disciplinary (two or more healthcare providers) and multi-treatment (two or more components) IDM programmes of at least three months' duration.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. If required, we contacted study authors to request additional data. We performed meta-analyses using random-effects modelling. We carried out sensitivity analyses for the quality of included studies and performed subgroup analyses based on setting, study design, dominant intervention components, and region.

MAIN RESULTS

Along with 26 studies included in the 2013 Cochrane Review, we added 26 studies for this update, resulting in 52 studies involving 21,086 participants for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Follow-up periods ranged between 3 and 48 months and were classified as short-term (up to 6 months), medium-term (6 to 15 months), and long-term (longer than 15 months) follow-up. Studies were conducted in 19 different countries. The mean age of included participants was 67 years, and 66% were male. Participants were treated in all types of healthcare settings, including primary (n =15), secondary (n = 22), and tertiary care (n = 5), and combined primary and secondary care (n = 10). Overall, the level of certainty of evidence was moderate to high. We found that IDM probably improves health-related QoL as measured by St. George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) total score at medium-term follow-up (mean difference (MD) -3.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) -6.16 to -1.63; 18 RCTs, 4321 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). A comparable effect was observed at short-term follow-up (MD -3.78, 95% CI -6.29 to -1.28; 16 RCTs, 1788 participants). However, the common effect did not exceed the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) of 4 points. There was no significant difference between IDM and control for long-term follow-up and for generic QoL. IDM probably also leads to a large improvement in maximum and functional exercise capacity, as measured by six-minute walking distance (6MWD), at medium-term follow-up (MD 44.69, 95% CI 24.01 to 65.37; 13 studies, 2071 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The effect exceeded the MCID of 35 metres and was even greater at short-term (MD 52.26, 95% CI 32.39 to 72.74; 17 RCTs, 1390 participants) and long-term (MD 48.83, 95% CI 16.37 to 80.49; 6 RCTs, 7288 participants) follow-up. The number of participants with respiratory-related admissions was reduced from 324 per 1000 participants in the control group to 235 per 1000 participants in the IDM group (odds ratio (OR) 0.64, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.81; 15 RCTs, median follow-up 12 months, 4207 participants; high-certainty evidence). Likewise, IDM probably results in a reduction in emergency department (ED) visits (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.50 to 0.93; 9 RCTs, median follow-up 12 months, 8791 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), a slight reduction in all-cause hospital admissions (OR 0.75, 95%CI 0.57 to 0.98; 10 RCTs, median follow-up 12 months, 9030 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and fewer hospital days per person admitted (MD -2.27, 95% CI -3.98 to -0.56; 14 RCTs, median follow-up 12 months, 3563 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Statistically significant improvement was noted on the Medical Research Council (MRC) Dyspnoea Scale at short- and medium-term follow-up but not at long-term follow-up. No differences between groups were reported for mortality, courses of antibiotics/prednisolone, dyspnoea, and depression and anxiety scores. Subgroup analysis of dominant intervention components and regions of study suggested context- and intervention-specific effects. However, some subgroup analyses were marked by considerable heterogeneity or included few studies. These results should therefore be interpreted with caution.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that IDM probably results in improvement in disease-specific QoL, exercise capacity, hospital admissions, and hospital days per person. Future research should evaluate which combination of IDM components and which intervention duration are most effective for IDM programmes, and should consider contextual determinants of implementation and treatment effect, including process-related outcomes, long-term follow-up, and cost-effectiveness analyses.

Strategies to improve smoking cessation rates in primary care

BACKGROUND

Primary care is an important setting in which to treat tobacco addiction. However, the rates at which providers address smoking cessation and the success of that support vary. Strategies can be implemented to improve and increase the delivery of smoking cessation support (e.g. through provider training), and to increase the amount and breadth of support given to people who smoke (e.g. through additional counseling or tailored printed materials).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of strategies intended to increase the success of smoking cessation interventions in primary care settings. To assess whether any effect that these interventions have on smoking cessation may be due to increased implementation by healthcare providers.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and trial registries to 10 September 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs (cRCTs) carried out in primary care, including non-pregnant adults. Studies investigated a strategy or strategies to improve the implementation or success of smoking cessation treatment in primary care. These strategies could include interventions designed to increase or enhance the quality of existing support, or smoking cessation interventions offered in addition to standard care (adjunctive interventions). Intervention strategies had to be tested in addition to and in comparison with standard care, or in addition to other active intervention strategies if the effect of an individual strategy could be isolated. Standard care typically incorporates physician-delivered brief behavioral support, and an offer of smoking cessation medication, but differs across studies. Studies had to measure smoking abstinence at six months' follow-up or longer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome - smoking abstinence - was measured using the most rigorous intention-to-treat definition available. We also extracted outcome data for quit attempts, and the following markers of healthcare provider performance: asking about smoking status; advising on cessation; assessment of participant readiness to quit; assisting with cessation; arranging follow-up for smoking participants. Where more than one study investigated the same strategy or set of strategies, and measured the same outcome, we conducted meta-analyses using Mantel-Haenszel random-effects methods to generate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 81 RCTs and cRCTs, involving 112,159 participants. Fourteen were rated at low risk of bias, 44 at high risk, and the remainder at unclear risk. We identified moderate-certainty evidence, limited by inconsistency, that the provision of adjunctive counseling by a health professional other than the physician (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.55; I2 = 44%; 22 studies, 18,150 participants), and provision of cost-free medications (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.76; I2 = 63%; 10 studies,7560 participants) increased smoking quit rates in primary care. There was also moderate-certainty evidence, limited by risk of bias, that the addition of tailored print materials to standard smoking cessation treatment increased the number of people who had successfully stopped smoking at six months' follow-up or more (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.59; I2 = 37%; 6 studies, 15,978 participants). There was no clear evidence that providing participants who smoked with biomedical risk feedback increased their likelihood of quitting (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.41; I2 = 40%; 7 studies, 3491 participants), or that provider smoking cessation training (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.41; I2 = 66%; 7 studies, 13,685 participants) or provider incentives (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.34; I2 = 0%; 2 studies, 2454 participants) increased smoking abstinence rates. However, in assessing the former two strategies we judged the evidence to be of low certainty and in assessing the latter strategies it was of very low certainty. We downgraded the evidence due to imprecision, inconsistency and risk of bias across these comparisons. There was some indication that provider training increased the delivery of smoking cessation support, along with the provision of adjunctive counseling and cost-free medications. However, our secondary outcomes were not measured consistently, and in many cases analyses were subject to substantial statistical heterogeneity, imprecision, or both, making it difficult to draw conclusions. Thirty-four studies investigated multicomponent interventions to improve smoking cessation rates. There was substantial variation in the combinations of strategies tested, and the resulting individual study effect estimates, precluding meta-analyses in most cases. Meta-analyses provided some evidence that adjunctive counseling combined with either cost-free medications or provider training enhanced quit rates when compared with standard care alone. However, analyses were limited by small numbers of events, high statistical heterogeneity, and studies at high risk of bias. Analyses looking at the effects of combining provider training with flow sheets to aid physician decision-making, and with outreach facilitation, found no clear evidence that these combinations increased quit rates; however, analyses were limited by imprecision, and there was some indication that these approaches did improve some forms of provider implementation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate-certainty evidence that providing adjunctive counseling by an allied health professional, cost-free smoking cessation medications, and tailored printed materials as part of smoking cessation support in primary care can increase the number of people who achieve smoking cessation. There is no clear evidence that providing participants with biomedical risk feedback, or primary care providers with training or incentives to provide smoking cessation support enhance quit rates. However, we rated this evidence as of low or very low certainty, and so conclusions are likely to change as further evidence becomes available. Most of the studies in this review evaluated smoking cessation interventions that had already been extensively tested in the general population. Further studies should assess strategies designed to optimize the delivery of those interventions already known to be effective within the primary care setting. Such studies should be cluster-randomized to account for the implications of implementation in this particular setting. Due to substantial variation between studies in this review, identifying optimal characteristics of multicomponent interventions to improve the delivery of smoking cessation treatment was challenging. Future research could use component network meta-analysis to investigate this further.

Towards precision in defining COPD exacerbations

COPD is the most prevalent chronic respiratory disease worldwide and a major cause of disability and death. Acute exacerbations of COPD remain a key feature of the disease in many patients and research assessing interventions to prevent and treat them requires a robust definition with high sensitivity and specificity. To date, no such definition exists, and multiple different definitions are used in clinical studies depending on the research question. The strengths and weaknesses of current definitions are discussed in the context of evolving knowledge and different settings in which studies are undertaken. Whether identification and recording of exacerbations remains essentially clinical, or can be identified with a dependable biomarker, it should be sensitive and adaptable to context while retaining clarity and facilitating data collection. This is essential to progress a better understanding of the pathophysiology and phenotypic expression of exacerbations to reduce their impact and personal burden for patients.

Pulmonary rehabilitation outcomes in individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The magnitude of response to pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is influenced by the selection of outcomes and measures.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to review all outcomes and measures used in clinical trials of PR for individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

METHODS

The review involved a search of Scopus, Web of Knowledge, Cochrane Library, EBSCO, Science Direct and PubMed databases for studies of stable individuals with COPD undergoing PR. Frequency of reporting for each domain, outcome and measure was synthesized by using Microsoft Excel.

RESULTS

We included 267 studies (43153 individuals with COPD). A broad range of domains (n=22), outcomes (n=163) and measures (n=217) were reported. Several measures were used for the same outcome. The most reported outcomes were exercise capacity (n=218) assessed with the 6-min walk test (n=140), health-related quality of life (n=204) assessed with the Saint George's respiratory questionnaire (n=99), and symptoms (n=158) assessed with the modified Medical Research Council dyspnea scale (n=56). The least reported outcomes were comorbidities, adverse events and knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review reinforces the need for a core outcome set for PR in individuals with COPD because of high heterogeneity in reported outcomes and measures. Future studies should assess the importance of each outcome for PR involving different stakeholders.

PROSPERO ID

CRD42017079935.

Smoking cessation intervention in Australian general practice: a secondary analysis of a cluster randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

GPs have limited capacity to routinely provide smoking cessation support. New strategies are needed to reach all smokers within this setting.

AIM

To evaluate the effect of a pharmacist-coordinated interdisciplinary smoking cessation intervention delivered in Australian general practice.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Secondary analysis of a cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) conducted in 41 Australian general practices.

METHOD

In all, 690 current smokers were included in this study: 373 from intervention clinics (n = 21) and 317 from control clinics (n = 18). A total of 166 current smokers had spirometry-confirmed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). In the intervention clinics, trained pharmacists provided smoking cessation support plus Quitline referral. Control clinics provided usual care plus Quitline referral. Those with COPD in the intervention group (n = 84) were referred for home medicines review (HMR) and home-based pulmonary rehabilitation (HomeBase), which included further smoking cessation support. Outcomes included carbon monoxide (CO)-validated smoking abstinence, self-reported use of smoking cessation aids, and differences between groups in readiness-to-quit score at 6 months.

RESULTS

Intention-to-treat analysis showed similar CO-validated abstinence rates at 6 months in the intervention (4.0%) and control clinics (3.5%). No differences were observed in readiness-to-quit scores between groups at 6 months. CO-validated abstinence rates were similar in those who completed HMR and at least six sessions of HomeBase to those with COPD in usual care.

CONCLUSION

A pharmacist-coordinated interdisciplinary smoking cessation intervention when integrated in a general practice setting had no advantages over usual care. Further research is needed to evaluate the effect of HMR and home-based pulmonary rehabilitation on smoking abstinence in smokers with COPD.

Defining Modern Pulmonary Rehabilitation. An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report

Pulmonary rehabilitation is a highly effective treatment for people with chronic lung disease but remains underused across the world. Recent years have seen the emergence of new program models that aim to improve access and uptake, including telerehabilitation and low-cost, home-based models. This workshop was convened to achieve consensus on the essential components of pulmonary rehabilitation and to identify requirements for successful implementation of emerging program models. A Delphi process involving experts from across the world identified 13 essential components of pulmonary rehabilitation that must be delivered in any program model, encompassing patient assessment, program content, method of delivery, and quality assurance, as well as 27 desirable components. Only those models of pulmonary rehabilitation that have been tested in clinical trials are currently considered as ready for implementation. The characteristics of patients most likely to succeed in each program model are not yet known, and research is needed in this area. Health professionals should use clinical judgment to determine those patients who are best served by a center-based, multidisciplinary rehabilitation program. A comprehensive patient assessment is critical for personalization of pulmonary rehabilitation and for effectively addressing individual patient goals. Robust quality-assurance processes are important to ensure that any pulmonary rehabilitation service delivers optimal outcomes for patients and health services. Workforce capacity-building and training should consider the skills necessary for emerging models, many of which are delivered remotely. The success of all pulmonary rehabilitation models will be judged on whether the essential components are delivered and on whether the expected patient outcomes, including improved exercise capacity, reduced dyspnea, enhanced health-related quality of life, and reduced hospital admissions, are achieved.

COPD Management in Community Pharmacy Results in Improved Inhaler Use, Immunization Rate, COPD Action Plan Ownership, COPD Knowledge, and Reductions in Exacerbation Rates

Purpose

To evaluate the effectiveness of a pilot community pharmacy care model for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to improve: 1) inhaler technique; 2) medication adherence; and 3) uptake of non-pharmacological treatment and prevention activities.

Patients and Methods

Forty "host" pharmacies in Sydney were invited to recruit eligible patients and to provide a counselling room/area in their pharmacy for service provision. Eligible patients were referred to two "consultant" pharmacists, specifically trained to deliver a specialized pharmacy COPD service which involved 3 in-pharmacy visits and 2 follow-up phone calls over a 6-month period. The service consisted of 1) inhaler technique assessment; 2) medication adherence assessment; and 3) referrals to the patient's general practitioner (GP) to facilitate the uptake of non-pharmacological resources as well as to review COPD medications/devices, as required. Pre-post analyses were conducted using paired Student's t-test and Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test for independent variables and chi-squared tests for proportional data.

Results

Nine "host" pharmacies recruited 40 patients, of whom 37 completed the baseline Visit and 27 completed all Visits. A total of 270 interventions were provided by the "consultant" pharmacists with most provided at Visit 1 (176). The most common interventions were addressing patient gaps in COPD knowledge and inhaler technique. A total of 119 referrals were made to GPs for various reasons, the most common being for a COPD action plan, pulmonary rehabilitation, or pneumonia vaccination. There were significant improvements pre-post intervention in inhaler use competence, COPD knowledge, immunization rate for pneumonia, exacerbation rate and COPD plan ownership.

Conclusion

In this pilot study, the specialized pharmacy-based COPD care model delivered by "consultant" pharmacists in community pharmacies provided significant health benefits for patients. Further research is needed to assess the model's effectiveness in a larger population as well as when measured against standard care.

Improving Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Symptoms Using a Team-Based Approach

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is the third leading cause of death in the United States (US), with West Virginia bearing a disproportionate disease burden. Complex COPD cases can be difficult to manage during a standard primary care provider (PCP) visit, and pharmacological treatment regimens should be individually tailored to each patient.

METHODS

To address these needs, the West Virginia University Department of Family Medicine created an interdisciplinary COPD specialty clinic that uses a team-based approach to treat patients with COPD. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the specialty clinic, we conducted a retrospective chart review to examine the impact of the clinic on patient hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and urgent care visits six months and one year before and after initiating care at the clinic. We also examined the impact of the clinic on patients' self-reported nicotine dependency, COPD symptoms, and tobacco use behavior. Patients referred to the clinic and having at least one visit from February 2015 to February 2019 were included in this study (n = 149).

RESULTS

Patients treated at the COPD specialty clinic had significantly fewer hospital admissions and ED visits six months after and one year after initiating care at the clinic as compared to six months before and one year before, respectively. Patients at this clinic also reported smoking significantly fewer cigarettes per day with significantly fewer self-identifying as smokers and experiencing significantly reduced COPD symptoms.

CONCLUSION

An interdisciplinary, team-based approach was effective for improving the health of COPD patients in an Appalachian academic primary care practice.

The feasibility of an innovative GP-physiotherapist partnership to identify and manage chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (INTEGRATED): study protocol

BACKGROUND

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) contributes significantly to mortality, hospitalisations and health care costs worldwide. There is evidence that the detection, accurate diagnosis and management of COPD are currently suboptimal in primary care. Physiotherapists are well-trained in cardiorespiratory management and chronic care but are currently underutilised in primary care. A cardiorespiratory physiotherapist working in partnership with general practitioners (GPs) has the potential to improve quality of care for people with COPD.

METHODS

A prospective pilot study will test the feasibility of an integrated model of care between GPs and physiotherapists to improve the diagnosis and management of people with COPD in primary care. Four general practices will be selected to work in partnership with four physiotherapists from their local health district. Patients at risk of developing COPD or those with a current diagnosis of COPD will be invited to attend a baseline assessment with the physiotherapist, including pre- and post-bronchodilator spirometry to identify new cases of COPD or confirm a current diagnosis and stage of COPD. The intervention for those with COPD will involve the physiotherapist and GP working in partnership to develop and implement a care plan involving the following tailored to patient need: referral to pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), physical activity counselling, medication review, smoking cessation, review of inhaler technique and education. Process outcomes will include the number of people invited and reviewed at the practice, the proportion with a new diagnosis of COPD, the number of patients eligible and referred to PR and the number who attended PR. Patient outcomes will include changes in symptoms, physical activity levels, smoking status and self-reported exacerbations.

DISCUSSION

If feasible, we will test the integration of physiotherapists within the primary care setting in a cluster randomised controlled trial. If the model improves health outcomes for the growing numbers of people with COPD, then it may provide a GP-physiotherapist model of care that could be tested for other chronic conditions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ANZCTR, ACTRN12619001127190. Registered on 12 August 2019-retrospectively registered.

Improving Exercise-Based Interventions for People Living with Both COPD and Frailty: A Realist Review

Background

People living with both chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and frailty have high potential to benefit from exercise-based interventions, including pulmonary rehabilitation, but face challenges completing them. Research to understand ways to optimise exercise-based interventions in this group is lacking. We aimed to understand how exercise-based interventions might improve outcomes for people living with both COPD and frailty.

Methods

This realist review used database searches and handsearching until October 2019 to identify articles of relevance to exercise-based interventions for people living with COPD and frailty. A scoping search explored what is important about the context of living with COPD and frailty, and what mechanisms might be important in how exercise-based interventions result in their intended outcomes. Through discussion with stakeholders, the review scope was refined to areas deemed pertinent to improving care. We retained articles within this refined scope and identified additional articles through targeted handsearching. Data were extracted and synthesised in a narrative, prioritised by relevance and rigour.

Results

Of 344 records identified, 35 were included in the review and 20 informed the final synthesis. Important contextual factors to consider included: negative beliefs about themselves and exercise-based interventions; heterogenous presentation and comorbidities; decreased reserves and multidimensional loss; and experiencing unpredictable health and disruptions. In these circumstances, mechanisms that may help maximise outcomes from exercise-based interventions included: trusting relationships; creating a shared understanding of needs; having the capacity to address multidimensional concerns; being able to individualise approaches to needs and priorities; and flexible approaches to intervention delivery. Mixed-methods research and explicit theorising were often absent.

Conclusion

Building trusting relationships, understanding priorities, using individualised and multidisciplinary approaches, and flexible service delivery can improve the value of exercise-based interventions for people living with both COPD and frailty. Development and evaluation of new and adapted interventions should consider these principles.