A secondary exploratory analysis of Physical Activity in COPD Patients Comparing Conventional and Web Based Pulmonary Rehabilitation: Is the Level of Supervision Important? (Preprint)
BACKGROUND Pulmonary Rehabilitation (PR) increases exercise capacity, with less clear evidence for Physical Activity (PA).The World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends at least 150-300 minutes of moderate intensity or 75-150 of vigorous intensity aerobic physical activity per week to reduce the risks of chronic disease. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of conventional PR versus web-based PR with respect to changes in PA. METHODS Patients with COPD were randomised to either conventional PR classes (n=51) or a web-based PR programme (n=52) for 7 weeks in a feasibility study. Accelerometers (Sensewear®) were worn pre and post intervention, PA was measured as steps/day and mean bouts of moderate activity for ≥2, ≥5, ≥10 and ≥20 mins. Measures were derived for patients with ≥8 hrs of data/day for ≥4 days using R language statistical software. Variables were explored to examine relationships with bouts of activity. RESULTS Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between groups. Complete PA data was available for web (n=20) and conventional (n=34) groups. The web group demonstrated a non-significant increase in steps/24hr which comprised mainly of short bouts of MVPA when compared with conventional PR (P=.2). The conventional group increased 20 min bouts of PA by 49.1% although this was not statistically significant (P=.07). At baseline, age (r =-0.21, P=.043), BMI (r=-0.311, P=.004) and FEV1% predicted (r=-0.248, P=.048) were significantly correlated with 10 min bouts of PA, however post intervention this was not observed. CONCLUSIONS The analysis detected a non-statistically significant difference in the pattern of PA between conventional and web-based PR groups, conventional PR being associated with an increase in 20 min bouts whilst the web group demonstrated an increase in steps/24hr. There appears to be a differing response emerging between the two interventions. CLINICALTRIAL ISRCTN03142263