Effectiveness and Feasibility of Digital Pulmonary Rehabilitation in Patients Undergoing Lung Cancer Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) has been shown to effectively support postsurgical recovery in patients with lung cancer (LC) at various stages. While digital PR programs offer a potential solution to traditional challenges, such as time and space constraints, their efficacy and feasibility for patients undergoing LC surgery remain unclear.

Objective: This systematic review aims to assess the feasibility and effectiveness of digital PR programs for individuals undergoing LC surgery.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted, retrieving data from 6 English and 4 Chinese databases from their inception to January 1, 2024. References in related studies were also manually reviewed. The primary outcomes assessed were physical capacity, lung function, and the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). The secondary outcomes were compliance, hospital stay, chest tube duration, anxiety, depression, and quality of life. Where applicable, recruitment and withdrawal rates were also evaluated. Meta-analysis and descriptive analysis were used to assess the outcomes.

Results: A total of 5 randomized controlled trials and 6 quasi-experimental studies (n=1063) were included, with 4 studies being included in the meta-analyses. Our meta-analyses revealed that digital PR reduced the decline in 6-minute walk distance (6-MWD) by an average of 15 m compared with routine PR programs from admission to discharge, demonstrating a clinically significant improvement in physical capacity (mean difference -15.00, 95% CI -25.65 to -4.34, P=.006). Additionally, digital PR was associated with a reduction (26/58, 45%) in the likelihood of PPCs (risk ratio 0.45, 95% CI 0.30-0.66, P<.001) and a reduction of 1.53 days in chest tube duration (mean difference -1.53, 95% CI -2.95 to -0.12, P=.03), without a statistically significant effect on postoperative hospital stay (mean difference -1.42, 95% CI -3.45 to 0.62, P=.17). Descriptive analyses suggested that digital PR has the potential to improve knowledge, lung function, quality of life, and self-efficacy, while reducing depression and anxiety. Notably, digital PR was found to be a safe, feasible, and acceptable supplementary intervention. Despite challenges with low recruitment, digital PR enhanced exercise compliance, increased patient satisfaction, and lowered dropout rates.

Conclusions: This systematic review is the first comprehensive analysis to suggest that digital PR is a safe, feasible, acceptable, and effective intervention for promoting recovery in patients with LC after surgery. Digital PR has the potential to be a valuable supplement, expanding access to traditional PR programs. Future research should prioritize the development of interactive and inclusive digital solutions tailored to diverse age groups and educational backgrounds. Rigorous studies, including large-scale, high-quality randomized controlled trials with detailed protocols and robust methodologies, are needed to assess the short-, medium-, and long-term efficacy of digital PR, ensuring reproducibility in future research.

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42023430271; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=430271.