Chest pains among chronic lung disease patients before and after a pulmonary rehabilitation programme; implementation in four countries on three continents

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanne van Kampen ◽  
Rupert Jones ◽  
Winceslaus Katagira ◽  
Bruce Kirenga ◽  
An Le Pham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Disease ◽  
Chronic Lung Disease ◽  
Pulmonary Rehabilitation ◽  
Rehabilitation Programme ◽  
Programme Implementation ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Chest Pains ◽  
Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programme

scholarly journals Effects of a Rehabilitation Programme Using a Nasal Inspiratory Restriction Device in COPD

2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (8) ◽  
pp. 4207
Author(s):  
Jose L. Gonzalez-Montesinos ◽  
Jorge R. Fernandez-Santos ◽  
Carmen Vaz-Pardal ◽  
Jesus G. Ponce-Gonzalez ◽  
Alberto Marin-Galindo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Rehabilitation ◽  
Rehabilitation Programme ◽  
Group Differences ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Maximum Value ◽  
Copd Patients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Pulmonary Rehabilitation Programme ◽  
Positive Increment

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patients are characterised for presenting dyspnea, which reduces their physical capacity and tolerance to physical exercise. The aim of this study was to analyse the effects of adding a Feel-Breathe (FB) device for inspiratory muscle training (IMT) to an 8-week pulmonary rehabilitation programme. Twenty patients were randomised into three groups: breathing with FB (FBG), oronasal breathing without FB (ONBG) and control group (CG). FBG and ONBG carried out the same training programme with resistance, strength and respiratory exercises for 8 weeks. CG did not perform any pulmonary rehabilitation programme. Regarding intra group differences in the value obtained in the post-training test at the time when the maximum value in the pre-training test was obtained (PostPRE), FBG obtained lower values in oxygen consumption (VO2, mean = −435.6 mL/min, Bayes Factor (BF10) > 100), minute ventilation (VE, −8.5 L/min, BF10 = 25), respiratory rate (RR, −3.3 breaths/min, BF10 = 2), heart rate (HR, −13.7 beats/min, BF10 > 100) and carbon dioxide production (VCO2, −183.0 L/min, BF10 = 50), and a greater value in expiratory time (Tex, 0.22 s, BF10 = 12.5). At the maximum value recorded in the post-training test (PostFINAL), FBG showed higher values in the total time of the test (Tt, 4.3 min, BF10 = 50) and respiratory exchange rate (RER, 0.05, BF10 = 1.3). Regarding inter group differences at PrePOST, FBG obtained a greater negative increment than ONBG in the ventilatory equivalent of CO2 (EqCO2, −3.8 L/min, BF10 = 1.1) and compared to CG in VE (−8.3 L/min, BF10 = 3.6), VCO2 (−215.9 L/min, BF10 = 3.0), EqCO2 (−3.7 L/min, BF10 = 1.1) and HR (−12.9 beats/min, BF10 = 3.4). FBG also showed a greater PrePOST positive increment in Tex (0.21 s, BF10 = 1.4) with respect to CG. At PreFINAL, FBG presented a greater positive increment compared to CG in Tt (4.4 min, BF10 = 3.2) and negative in VE/VCO2 intercept (−4.7, BF10 = 1.1). The use of FB added to a pulmonary rehabilitation programme in COPD patients could improve tolerance in the incremental exercise test and energy efficiency. However, there is only a statically significant difference between FBG and ONBG in EqCO2. Therefore, more studies are necessary to reach a definitive conclusion about including FB in a pulmonary rehabilitation programme.

scholarly journals Myocardial Infarction Injury in Patients with Chronic Lung Disease Entering Pulmonary Rehabilitation: Frequency and Association with Heart Rate Parameters

PM&R ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 917-925
Author(s):  
Carmen A. Sima ◽  
Benny C. Lau ◽  
Carolyn M. Taylor ◽  
Stephan F. van Eeden ◽  
W. Darlene Reid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Heart Rate ◽  
Lung Disease ◽  
Chronic Lung Disease ◽  
Pulmonary Rehabilitation

scholarly journals Minimal versus specialist equipment in the delivery of pulmonary rehabilitation: protocol for a non-inferiority randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. e047524
Author(s):  
Claire M Nolan ◽  
Jessica A Walsh ◽  
Suhani Patel ◽  
Ruth E Barker ◽  
Oliver Polgar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Lung Disease ◽  
Exercise Capacity ◽  
Chronic Lung Disease ◽  
Pulmonary Rehabilitation ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Global Rating ◽  
Process Data ◽  
Exercise Equipment

IntroductionPulmonary rehabilitation (PR), an exercise and education programme for people with chronic lung disease, aims to improve exercise capacity, breathlessness and quality of life. Most evidence to support PR is from trials that use specialist exercise equipment, for example, treadmills (PR-gym). However, a significant proportion of programmes do not have access to specialist equipment with training completed with minimal exercise equipment (PR-min). There is a paucity of robust literature examining the efficacy of supervised, centre-based PR-min. We aim to determine whether an 8-week supervised, centre-based PR-min programme is non-inferior to a standard 8-week supervised, centre-based PR-gym programme in terms of exercise capacity and health outcomes for patients with chronic lung disease.Methods and analysisParallel, two-group, assessor-blinded and statistician-blinded, non-inferiority randomised trial. 436 participants will be randomised using minimisation at the individual level with a 1:1 allocation to PR-min (intervention) or PR-gym (control). Assessment will take place pre-PR (visit 1), post-PR (visit 2) and 12 months following visit 1 (visit 3). Exercise capacity (incremental shuttle walk test), dyspnoea (Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ)-Dyspnoea), health-related quality of life (CRQ), frailty (Short Physical Performance Battery), muscle strength (isometric quadriceps maximum voluntary contraction), patient satisfaction (Global Rating of Change Questionnaire), health economic as well as safety and trial process data will be measured. The primary outcome is change in exercise capacity between visit 1 and visit 2. Two sample t-tests on an intention to treat basis will be used to estimate the difference in mean primary and secondary outcomes between patients randomised to PR-gym and PR-min.Ethics and disseminationLondon-Camden and Kings Cross Research Ethics Committee and Health Research Authority have approved the study (18/LO/0315). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals, presented at international conferences, disseminated through social media, patient and public routes and directly shared with stakeholders.Trial registration numberISRCTN16196765.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document