Yanping Du, Jun Lin, Xiaoxia Wang, Yan Zhang, Hua Ge, Ye Wang, Zhiyi Ma, Huaping Zhang, Jun Liu, Zhiyong Wang, Meixia Lin, Fayu Ni, Xi Li, Hui Tan, Shifan Tan
{"title":"Early Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Acute Exacerbation of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Yanping Du, Jun Lin, Xiaoxia Wang, Yan Zhang, Hua Ge, Ye Wang, Zhiyi Ma, Huaping Zhang, Jun Liu, Zhiyong Wang, Meixia Lin, Fayu Ni, Xi Li, Hui Tan, Shifan Tan","doi":"10.1080/15412555.2022.2029834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is an essential method for Acute exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) recovery. We perform a meta-analysis to compare early PR with usual care. A literature search was performed through these databases: PubMed, MEDLINE database, Google Scholar, Cochrane, Embase from inception to July 2021. Eligible trials were clinical randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of early PR and usual care in AECOPD patients. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was FEV1% predicted, 6-min walk test (6MWD), modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) and George Respiratory Questionnaire-total (SGRQ-total). The secondary outcomes were borg dyspnea score, short-form 36 health survey questionnaire physical (SF-36 physical) and SF-36 mental. We included 13 RCTs with a total of 866 patients. There were no significant effects of the PR group on measures of FEV1% predicted (MD = 0.50, 95%CI -1.43 to 2.44, <i>Z</i> = 0.51, <i>p</i> = 0.61), borg dyspnea score (MD = -0.88, 95%CI -1.89 to 0.13, <i>Z</i> = 1.71, <i>p</i> = 0.09) and SF-36 mental (MD = 4.34, 95%CI -1.64 to 10.32, <i>Z</i> = 1.42, <i>p</i> = 0.16) compared with usual care. PR group achieved better 6MWD (MD = 97.58, 95%CI 17.21 to 177.96, <i>Z</i> = 2.38, <i>p</i> = 0.02), mMRC (MD = -0.36, 95%CI -0.52 to -0.21, <i>Z</i> = 4.56, <i>p</i> ˂ 0.00001), SGRQ-total (MD= -9.67, 95%CI -16.23 to -3.11, <i>Z</i> = 2.89, <i>p</i> = 0.004) and SF-36 physical (MD = 4.98, 95%CI 0.60 to 9.35, <i>Z</i> = 2.23, <i>p</i> = 0.03) compared with usual care group. Early PR in AECOPD patients would lead to better 6MWD, mMRC, SGRQ-total and SF-36 physical. But there were no significant effects of the PR group on measures of FEV1% predicted, borg dyspnea score and SF-36 mental.</p>","PeriodicalId":10704,"journal":{"name":"COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease","volume":" ","pages":"69-80"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2022.2029834","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is an essential method for Acute exacerbation in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) recovery. We perform a meta-analysis to compare early PR with usual care. A literature search was performed through these databases: PubMed, MEDLINE database, Google Scholar, Cochrane, Embase from inception to July 2021. Eligible trials were clinical randomized controlled trials comparing the effects of early PR and usual care in AECOPD patients. The primary endpoint of this meta-analysis was FEV1% predicted, 6-min walk test (6MWD), modified Medical Research Council (mMRC) and George Respiratory Questionnaire-total (SGRQ-total). The secondary outcomes were borg dyspnea score, short-form 36 health survey questionnaire physical (SF-36 physical) and SF-36 mental. We included 13 RCTs with a total of 866 patients. There were no significant effects of the PR group on measures of FEV1% predicted (MD = 0.50, 95%CI -1.43 to 2.44, Z = 0.51, p = 0.61), borg dyspnea score (MD = -0.88, 95%CI -1.89 to 0.13, Z = 1.71, p = 0.09) and SF-36 mental (MD = 4.34, 95%CI -1.64 to 10.32, Z = 1.42, p = 0.16) compared with usual care. PR group achieved better 6MWD (MD = 97.58, 95%CI 17.21 to 177.96, Z = 2.38, p = 0.02), mMRC (MD = -0.36, 95%CI -0.52 to -0.21, Z = 4.56, p ˂ 0.00001), SGRQ-total (MD= -9.67, 95%CI -16.23 to -3.11, Z = 2.89, p = 0.004) and SF-36 physical (MD = 4.98, 95%CI 0.60 to 9.35, Z = 2.23, p = 0.03) compared with usual care group. Early PR in AECOPD patients would lead to better 6MWD, mMRC, SGRQ-total and SF-36 physical. But there were no significant effects of the PR group on measures of FEV1% predicted, borg dyspnea score and SF-36 mental.
期刊介绍:
From pathophysiology and cell biology to pharmacology and psychosocial impact, COPD: Journal Of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease publishes a wide range of original research, reviews, case studies, and conference proceedings to promote advances in the pathophysiology, diagnosis, management, and control of lung and airway disease and inflammation - providing a unique forum for the discussion, design, and evaluation of more efficient and effective strategies in patient care.